
JP^K 




V N 



V 




























* 






h 



REVIEW 



OF THE 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY; 

* IN A 

SERIES OF LECTURES, 

DELIVERED IN BROADWAY HALL, NEW -YORK, 
AUGUST, 1829. 

To which is prefixed, an extract from 

WYTTENBACH'S OPUSCULA, 

ON THE ANCIENT NOTICES OF THE JEWISH NATION 
PREVIOUS TO THE TIME OF ALEXANDER THE GREAT. 



it — == — = 

^ * lt\ BY ABNER KNEELAND. 

•■ ■■ 

M Prove all tilings; hold fast that which is ffood."_»£* 
SIXTH EDITION. / •'/ 

BOSTON: N^ W AStf^ 

OFFICE OF THE INVESTIGATOR;: 



1835. 




*' 



V 



* .tf<v 



I' 



H^' 



It 



en 



CONTENTS, 



Page 

Preface, 5 

Wyttenbach's Opuscula, - - 9 

LECTURE I. 

Introduction, - - - - 23 

LECTURE a 

Historical Evidence, ------'... 45 

LECTURE HI. 

Evidences of Christianity, -------- 69 

Suetonius and Tacitus, -------- gg 

Pliny the younger, --------- 87 

LECTURE IV. 

Of the ancient fathers, - - - - - ^ - . 94 

LECTURE V. 

The ancient fathers, continued, - - - - - - 113 

Barnabas, ------.... 114 

Clemens Romanus, --------- fo 

The Shepherd of Hennas, - - 115 

Ignatius, jb. 

Polycarp, - 116 

Papias, - ib. 

Justin Martyr, ---.. n§ 

Irenaeus, -------.... 139 

Athenagoras, ------.... 123 

Clemens Alexandrinus, ---..... jb. 

Tertullian, ---..-.... 124 

Cyprian, 126 

Lactantius, -----..... 128 

Athanasius, ---••-.-.. j^,. 

Gregory Thaumaturgus, -------- ih. 

Eusebius, ------.... 129 

Jerom, --.-.. 131 



4 CONTENTS. 

LECTURE VI. 
The ancient fathers, concluded. 

Augustin, St. Austin, 135 

The gospels, ---------- 140 

Evidences of Christianity, concluded, ------ 146 

Nonexistence of Christ — not** 149 

Melito, Bishop of Sardis — note, - .. 152 

The value of religion, compared with the evils which grow out of 

the abuses of it, - - - - 153 

LECTURE VII. 

Conclusion, ---- 158 

Supplement, 161 

On the passage in Josephus, - lb. 

On the internal evidence of Christianity, ----- 170 

APPENDIX. 

Remarks on the passage* in Tacitus, ------ 176 

On Pliny, - ~- 177 

The Epistle to the Hebrews, authenticity thereof, - 178 

Extracts from letters, &c. .-- 182 

Specimens of nlthiness, &c. ------- 184 

Old Testament attributes of the Deity, 189 



PREFACE. 



Kind and gentle Reader, 

If thy mind is already made up, with a determination 
never to alter it, right or wrongs that the Bible is of divine ori- 
gin, and comes to thee, claiming thy belief by divine authority, 
and that the christian doctrine is certainly true, so true, that it is 
impious to re-examine the evidences on which it is founded, then 
I would advise thee not to read this book ; for notwithstanding 
all thy prepossessions and prejudices in favor of the Bible and 
christian doctrine, thy faith will be most assuredly shaken, if not 
wholly destroyed, on perusing this work. But if thou art still 
an enquirer after truth, and art ready to receive and be contented 
with whatever is true, more or less ; if thou art satisfied that 
truth never loses any thing by investigation, but like the pre- 
cious diamond, the more it is rubbed the brighter it will shine, 
then I sincerely entreat thee to lay aside thy prepossessions, and 
candidly examine the following pages. 

Like many others, I once thought that a belief in future exist- 
ence was absolutely necessary to present happiness. I have 
discovered my mistake. Time, a thousand years hence, is no 
more to me now^ than time a thousand years past. As no event 
could have harmed me, when I existed not, so no event can pos- 
sibly harm me when / am no more. By anticipating and calcu- 
lating too much on future felicity, and dreading, or at least/mr- 
ing, future misery, man often loses sight of present enjoyments, 
and neglects present duties. When men shall discover that 
nothing can be known beyond this life, and that there is no ra- 
tional ground for any such belief, they will begin to think more 

1* 



6 PREFACE. 

of improving the condition of the human species. Their whole 
thoughts will then be turned upon what man has done, and what 
he can still do, for the benefit of man. As they will be delivered 
from all fear of invisible voluntary agents, that may do them 
harm, so they will no longer look up to such agents for help. 
But they will study more their own powers and the powers and 
properties of nature. They will discover how much time and 
labor is spent entirely uselessly, and worse than uselessly— per- 
niciously; that so far from improving the condition of man, 
such labors only tend to destroy his own peace, and render him 
an enemy to his fellow man. 

If the immense labor that is devoted daily, yearly, and con- 
stantly, in making Bibles and a thousand foolish tracts, that 
scatter moral darkness, rather than light, and do not serve to 
improve the condition of man at all, at least on the whole ; if 
the millions of dollars drawn from the people annually for 
which they either have no return, or else that which is worse 
than none, were expended in feeding and clothing the children 
of the land, and in giving them all a useful education, both 
ignorance and poverty, and much of their almost inseparable 
companions, vice and wretchedness, might be banished from our 
earth. 

If the clergy, one and all, were to turn their attention to these 
things, they might soon become the most useful people in the 
nation, without laboring, perhaps, much harder than many of 
them do at present ; whereas, now (I speak my mind freely) I 
consider them the most useless. If they are useful at all, they 
are useful not as clergymen, but as mere moral men, studying 
how to make mankind useful and happy in this world, instead 
of preparing their souls for another ; when they are totally ig- 
norant, both of the souls of men and of the world for which 
they are preparing them. 

But, it may be asked, will not these lectures be as useless as 
the Bible, and as the tracts of which there is so much complaint 1 



PREFACE. 7 

To which I answer, I hope the time will come when this will be 
the case. But that time is not yet. These lectures will be use- 
ful only as an antidote to the poison of the others ! Happy, in- 
deed, will it be for mankind, when they shall no longer stand 
in need of such an antidote. Medicine is not useful for food ; 
but only as an antidote to disease. Mankind have been deceived, 
and these lectures are necessary to undeceive them. But when 
they shall be undeceived, and children taught as they should be, 
to know what can be known, and to believe nothing but what 
can be rationally inferred from known facts, then, but not till 
then, these lectures will be no longer necessary or useful. 

If it be asked, what has prompted me to this investigation? 
I answer, persecution ! Notwithstanding all the discrepancies 
I found in the gospels; notwithstanding I had become con- 
vinced that the Pentateuch, in its present form, was compiled 
since the Babylonish captivity; notwithstanding all my doubts 
and scepticism growing out of the internal evidence of the 
Bible ; yet, had I been permitted honestly to declare those dis- 
coveries, my feelings in favor of immortality were such, that I 
doubt whether I should ever have undertaken this last investiga- 
tion, had it not been for persecution! But I now honestly and 
sincerely declare, that although I thought it very cruel at the 
time, neither can I persuade myself to believe that it was done 
from justifiable motives, yet I am now glad, heartily glad, that 
I was thus persecuted. If people only knew what it is to be 
free, they would be no longer slaves— slaves to the opinions of 
others, the worst kind of slavery. Man free (I speak of man 
collectively) is lord of this globe. He neither sees nor knows, 
loves nor fears, any being above him— the ocean is his fish-pond, 
the extended forests are his park ; he makes every thing in his 
power subservient to his use. He has, in some measure, control 
over the elements ; and to uncontrollable powers he cheerfully 
submits, because to such powers he attaches no will, either good 
or bad ; whether earthquakes, tornadoes, volcanoes, or the sweep- 



8 



PREFACE. 



ing sirocco, they are neither commanded, nor can their force be 
stayed by man. But, aside from these, he enslaves as many 
of the other animals as he can make subservient to his use — 
(wicked man enslaves his own species!) and feels no control 
of mind whatever: but mutually consults kindred minds, 
for the mutual benefit of the whole race. While man, enslaved, 
is a poor helpless creature ; he feels that he is indebted to 
the will of another for his very existence, as well as for every 
moment of his life. He cringes through fear of imagi- 
nary demons; he sacrifices much of his time and labor to 
appease the wrath of imaginary gods, or else to curry their 
favor ; he maintains a useless horde of sycophants and hypo- 
crites, which, as he thinks, have more influence with these invisi- 
ble agents than himself: in a word, he hardly dares to think for 
himself, much less to speak his own thoughts. What is the 
value of life in such a condition 1 Let the man, therefore, who 
dares to be free, read, and candidly weigh, the evidences and 
arguments he will find in the following pages. Should any errors 
be discovered, let them be pointed out ; and they shall be at- 
tended to by the author's own free man, but the public's very 
humble servant, 

ABNER KNEELAND. 
New-York, November^, 1829. 

N. B. I have added a note here, for the sake of making a remark on the 
note, page 30, as I have been advised, even by a friend, to suppress that 
note altogether. But, on mature reflection, I do not think it expedient ; 
besides, (being on stereotype,) it is not altogether convenient. It states a 
fact, which when properly understood, I have no wish to conceal or suppress. 
Please to alter the tense a little, however, and read, " I have occasionally 

inserted," " on which I might have retreated," " should I have felt a 

disposition to do so." The first part of the note alludes to the time I com- 
menced the review : the latter, to the time I put the work to the press. I 
contend that every man, who has any faith at all, has the privilege of 
maintaining and defending his belief, and is a consistent believer, notwith- 
standing his doubts, until his doubts overbalance his belief; but to main- 
tain his profession of belief after that, i. e. after his doubts are stronger than 
his belief, and prohability, in his mind, is on the other side of the question, 
would be dishonest — would be hypocrisy ! A. IL 

Aw York, June 1, 1830. 



EXTRACT FROM 

WYTTENBACH'S OPUSCULA. 

[The following extract is prefixed to this review, as 
having an immediate bearing on the evidences of Chris- 
tianity. According to the New Testament, both Jesus and 
his apostles constantly appealed to the Old Testament, as 
being of divine authority. But what confidence can be 
placed in the ancient writings of a people so insignificant 
and obscure as to be, as it were, totally unknown to other 
nations, till at least a century after all the facts, real or 
pretended, therein recorded, were said to have been written? 
Who ever knew any thing about King David, or King 
Solomon, and the splendid temple built at Jerusalem by the 
latter, except the Jews? Even in the historical facts, much 
allowance should be made for exaggeration — it is natural 
for all nations to w T ish to be thought somebody ; and every 
thing bordering on the marvellous should be rejected.*] 

Extract on the ancient notices of the Jewish nation, previous 
to the time of Alexander the Great ; from Daniel Wytten- 
bacKs Opuscula, Vol II. p. 416. Amsterdam, 1821. 
De unitate Dei. 

But there were (it is said) many wise men among the 
Egyptians and Phenicians, who judged of divine things 
more accurately than the common people. I know it. And 

* The reader is referred to a work, entitled, " The Fabrication of the 
Pentateuch proved, by the Anachronisms contained in those books. By a 
learned and eminent Writer." This learned and eminent writer, is no less 
than the author of the Essays embodied in the following work. 



10 

these wise men it is also said, received their knowledge of 
the one God from the Jews, and transmitted it to the 
Greeks. Of this I have no proof. Men, naturally of 
capacity so good, as to understand and despise the popular 
errors, might with the same capacity easily comprehend, 
what nature has certainly not placed among her recondite 
truths ; that the divine power was rather concentred in one 
deity, than divided among many. This may be affirmed 
of the wise men of Greece, as well as those of Egypt and 
Phenicia. Unless we deem them inferior in natural talent 
to many men of the middle ages, who could not assent to 
the errors of established theology however consecrated by 
authority. 

But I will undertake to show, that the Jews first came 
into notice among the Greeks, after the time of Alexander 
the Great ; and that the historical monuments preceding that 
period make not the slightest mention of any Jewish transac- 
tion. Many of the Greeks, their chief men for learning 
and talent, Thales, Solon, Pythagoras, Democritus, Plato, 
led by the love of wisdom, visited remote countries, as 
Egypt, Phenicia, and Babylon. How happens it that the 
writings of these eminent men, the accounts transmitted 
to us of their sayings and doings, contain no mention of 
the Jews whatever ? The times of Thales, Solon, and 
Pythagoras, are coincident with the re-instatement of the 
Jews after the Babylonish captivity. At that period, Cyrus 
subdued Croesus and the Lydians ; transactions which 
were nearly connected with the affairs of Greece ; so that 
it is hardly possible the deeds and expeditions of Cyrus 
should have been unknown to the Greeks, especially to 
their sages who travelled over that part of Asia. If there- 
fore, at that period, the Jews had any name or reputation 
among other nations, would not Solon and the other wise 
men whom we have mentioned, inflamed as they were 



wyttenbach's opuscula. 11 

with the love of letters, have visited Judea, as well as 
Egypt and Chaldea ? Would not Homer, the cotemporary 
of Solomon, the most famous among the Jewish kings for 
wisdom and knowledge — would not Homer, the most 
learned of poets, who had collected by travelling so much 
knowledge of foreign and remote nations, and who has 
noticed in his poems so many things that fell under his 
own observation, or which were told him by others — who 
not unfrequently mentions the Egyptians and Phenicians ; 
would not he notice the Jewish people ? Yet he mentions 
nothing whatever concerning the Jews. Those who be- 
lieve in the personal meeting of Pythagoras and Ezechiel^ 
commit a shameful chronological erroi ; and bring toge- 
ther persons separated by many years : others believe that 
Plato acquired a knowledge of the trinity from the sacred 
books of the Old Testament : but nothing can be more 
silly than this attempt to trace Grecian learning from 
Judea ; and those who know the least of the subject, are 
the most hardy in their assertions. 

Let us dismiss the poets, most of whom abound in 
learning, and show it in their writings ; but none of whom 
furnish the least trace of evidence respecting the Jews. 
Let us dismiss the followers of that day, of whom the 
writings of Aristotle and Plato, the chief of them, have 
reached our times : is there one Jewish notice to be found 
in any part of them ? Yet Plato travelled into Egypt for 
the sake of knowledge. Aristotle also, so well versed in 
the history of the times, so enquiring, who had not only 
Alexander himself as his correspondent but those also 
who were companions of Alexander's expedition, and who 
communicated to him whatever was worthy of notice in 
foreign countries and among foreign nations. If there- 
fore any of them had visited the Jews, or considered 
that nation who worshipped one God only, as a circum- 



12 WYTTENBACH ? S OPUSCULA. 

stance new and proper to be related, would not some of 
them have communicated this fact to Aristotle ? There 
was room enough to notice the Jews, in the works of 
that philosopher who has described the public transactions 
of the Greeks, and of other nations. But there is no men- 
tion of the Jews in any part of the works of Aristotle that 
have come down to us, or in the fragments of such as have 
been lost. 

Let us review 7 the historians, who have touched upon 
the public affairs of the Egyptians, Persians, and other 
nations connected with them. Out of a great number, 
two only, but of great repute, have descended to us, He- 
rodotus and Xenophon. The former carefully travelled 
over these countries, and diligently mentions whatever he 
had observed personally, or had heard from others. The 
other in the course of his military expedition was well 
acquainted with Persia, and that part of Asia, which was 
in the immediate vicinity of Judea : which of these his- 
torians, has made any mention of the Jews ? We may 
make the same enquiry as to Ctesias, Eudoxus, and 
others, whose works are lost. Of the truth of this remark, 
one argument, and that conclusive, is, that Josephus, and 
after Josephus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Eusebius, and the 
other ancient fathers, who have anxiously collected from 
the Greek writers whatever testimonies are extant con- 
cerning the Jews, have not been able to adduce one pas- 
sage authentic or worthy of credit. I shall speak again 
of this, after having noticed the writers of the age of 
Alexander. For my former suggestion that the Jews 
were first noticed by the Greeks after that period, has not 
the same force as if the Jews suddenly at that time ac- 
quired a name among the Greeks. So in fact it was. For 
slight and obscure was the knowledge of the Jews among 
the Greeks, until their country was frequently visited in 



wyttenbach's opuscula. 13 

consequence of the wars between the Ptolemies and the 
Seleucidiae, and colonies were transported into Egypt and 
Syria. 

All the historians of the transactions of Alexander who 
are worthy of any credit, are totally silent as to the Jews. 
Yet this was the time and the occasion, when the Greeks 
might have put an end to their long ignorance, and ac- 
quired some knowledge of that people. Alexander, having 
taken Syria, and sacked Tyre, went toward Egypt. He 
passed through Palestine, whose city Gaza, garrisoned by 
the Persians, alone made any opposition to his progress. 
Therefore having passed through Judea, and having been 
retarded in his passage by the necessity of taking Gaza, 
so little did he think of the Jews, that his thoughts were 
exclusively occupied by the capture of Gaza, and his in- 
tended occupation of Egypt. For as to the story related 
by Josephus, and those who copied him, of the visit of 
Alexander to Jerusalem, it can easily be shewn to be a 
Jewish fabrication, in consequence of the chagrin of the 
Jews that no mention is made of them. This is acknow- 
ledged by all the best critics on history, and in particular 
it has been demonstrated by the diligence of the Marquis 
de St. Groix, in his Examen critique des historiens d ? 
Alexandre le grand, p. 68, et seq. ; et not. 13. It must be 
strange to every body but a Jew, that no mention is made 
of that nation by the writers who have recorded the trans- 
actions of Alexander the Great, when the barbarous and 
before unheard of names of the Dahae, Aspii, Malli, Sa- 
bracse, Arachosii, are met with ! The Jews, it may be 
said, voluntarily submitted to Alexander, that no force 
might be used against them; nor did he do any thing that 
his historians thought it necessary to relate in this respect. 
Yet, the same historians do not pass over in silence the 
other nations who submitted ; but speak of their character, 

2 



14 wyttenbach's opuscula. 

manners, and history. The truth is, there was no occa- 
sion given to speak of the Jews in the histories of Alexan- 
der. Yet he had as his companions in arms, not a few 
learned and philosophic men, who whatever they might 
have known concerning the Jews, do not appear to have 
communicated it to Aristotle or any other philosopher of that 
day. Since then, I appear to have in support of this opi- 
nion, the strong argument, that Josephus could adduce no 
authentic and credible passage when he wished to shew 
that the Jews were known to the Greeks ; let us examine 
its value somewhat more minutely. 

Apion, the grammarian, had asserted the recent ap- 
pearance of the Jews, alleging that their very name was 
recent and unheard of among other nations ; nor had 
many centuries passed since the ignorance of the existence 
of the Jews was general. Josephus undertook to refute 
this calumny in two books ; and a great part of his obser- 
vations are levelled at the negligence, and the recent 
standing of the Greeks themselves ; and in collecting pas- 
sages from the Greek writers, wherein the Jews were men- 
tioned. It is not my business here, to discuss whether he 
had reason to complain of the recent standing and the 
negligence of the Greeks. But thus the fact is ; if faith 
be given to the evidence of the writers cited for this pur- 
pose by Josephus, he proves nothing, unless some Greek 
prior to the time of Alexander, had received some slight 
and obscure knowledge of the Jews, and this knowledge 
had been brought home to the Greeks, after the Jewish 
territory had been much frequented during the wars be- 
tween the Ptolemies and the Seleucidse. His evidences 
are such as may be well contested. 

And first, he mentions 1. 22. that Pythagoras took 
many of his institutions and doctrines from the Jews. But 
as no writing of Pythagoras is extant, by which this can 



wyttenbach's opuscula. 15 

be proved, he cites Hermippus, a celebrated author of the 
history of philosophy, but long after Alexander. See 
Vossius de hist. Graec. I. 16. What says Hermippus ? 
" Pythagoras imitated the opinions of the Jews, and the 
Thracians." Now this is a conjecture of Hermippus, who 
had some knowledge of the Jews, rather than a fact drawn 
from the works of writers, who lived near the time of Py- 
thagoras, or previous to Alexander. For among these 
writers, no mention whatever is made of the Jews. Nor 
does Hermippus say that Pythagoras himself was ever 
among the Jews. Had he made such an assertion, it 
would surely have been brought forward by Josephus in- 
stead of relying on a doubtful and obscure passage. Her- 
mippus had opportunity enough of saying this had it been 
true, since he occupied several books with the life and doc- 
trines of Pythagoras. 

On this authority do all the ancient fathers rely, who 
contend that Pythagoras had visited Judea. So. Origen 
against Celsus, I. 15, 16, was deceived in this respect, 
thinking that the passage of Hermippus lauded by Jose- 
phus, was taken from the first book Peri ton Pythagoron 
biblion. As Hermippus joins the Thracians with the Jews, 
and insinuates that their doctrines were similar, why might 
not the Greeks learn the unity of God from the Thracians 
their neighbours, whom they knew, rather than from 
the obscure and unnoticed Jews, whom they knew not : 
if indeed the Greeks were incapable of discovering this 
truth by their own ingenuity? For, as Herodotus tells 
us, IV. 94, Zamolxis was worshipped as the deity of the 
Thracians, by some horrid kind of sacrifice. The com- 
mon opinion among them was, that the soul, after the 
death of the body, returned to God ; nor did they believe 
that the Jupiter who sent lightning and thunder from the 



16 wyttenbach's opuscula. 

skies was God : yet they held that there was no other 
Zamolxis whom they worshipped. 

A few words more as to Pythagoras. There are two 
Greek writers who are of opinion that he was acquainted 
with the Jews : Hermippus, of whom I have already 
spoken, and Porphyry in his life of Pythagoras, ch. 16. 
" They say, that Pythagoras visited the Egyptians, Ara- 
bians, Chaldeans, and Hebrews." But the passage is of 
dubious authority ; for Cyrill, in his reply to Julian X. p. 
340, cites this very passage, omitting the words kai 
Ebraious, [and Hebrews,] which the fathers who praise 
the Jews at the expense of the Greeks insert! add also that 
the word phesin " they say" shews that Porphyry referred 
to that story-teller Diogenes, whose books Peri ton uper 
thoulen apiston, were reviewed by Photius in his Bibliotheca 
Cod. 166, p. 184, et seq. 

Josephus afterwards praises Theophrastus, who says 
that the Tyrians had the oath called Corban ; as having 
named the Tyrians for or in lieu of the Jews. But if it be 
true, as Josephus asserts, that the Jews alone had that oath 
in use, it follows that very little indeed was known of the 
Jews, if Theophrastus could mistake them for Tyrians. 
Nor do I see any improbability in the Tyrians using the 
same oath by the same name. But what is most extraor- 
dinary is, that Josephus should refer to this obscure passage 
in Theophrastus, and omit a plainer one, which Eusebius 
has noted in his Proep. Evang. IX. 2, citing an oration of 
Porphyry de Abstinent II. 26, as if the passage were taken 
from Theophrastus. The passage is thus corrupted in 
Porphyry : Kaitoi Suron men Ioudaioi dia ten ex arches 
thusian eti kai nun phesin o Theophrastos zoothutoun ei ton 
auton (tropon) emas keleuoien thuein apostaiemen an tes 
praxeos ; neither is the reading more satisfactory in Euse- I 
biiis. If therefore any one should assert that the mention 



wyttenbach's opuscula. 17 

of Theophrastus is inserted there from any other book, he 
will assert that which is improbable; especially as it is 
omitted by Josephus, who anxiously searched for traces of 
the Jews among other authors. But let it be granted that 
Theophrastus does mention the Jews ; he speaks of them 
as if his knowledge of them was very slight, and by no 
means proposes them as examples to be imitated. 

The third author mentioned by Josephus, is Herodotus, 
II. 104, where he speaks of circumcision, " the Phenicians 
and the Syrians of Palestine acknowledge that they imi- 
tated the Egyptians in this respect : but the Syrians who 
dwell near the rivers Thermodon and Parthenion, and the 
Macrones, their neighbors, are said to have recently bor- 
rowed this rite from Colchis." To this passage Josephus 
adds his own opinion, viz. " that of the inhabitants of 
Palestine, the Jews were the only people who used cir- 
cumcision." But the Syrians of Palestine, are not called 
Jews by Herodotus : they were the inhabitants of the sea 
coast from Tyre to Egypt, as Wesseling ad. h. 1. et III. 4, 
has well observed, who adds, " I cannot discover that He- 
rodotus had any familiar knowledge of the Jews. He 
did not neglect the Phenicians or the Syrians of Palestine ; 
and he notices those who had possession of the sea coast, 
as the Philistines ; but it is not likely that they practised 
the ceremony of circumcision." 

That Herodotus meant the Jews by his expressions 
above mentioned, is quite improbable ; for he appears to 
have been ignorant of their name, and notices the rite of 
circumcision as something worthy of remark. 

Fourthly, Choerilus is brought forward; who places 
among the nations accompanying Xerxes in his expedi- 
■bn, a cohort which he thus describes. " A strange kind 
If people followed the camp, who spake the Phenician 
ifcguage with an unknown accent. They inhabit the 

2* 



s 



18 wyttenbach's opuscula. 

mountains of Solyma near a vast lake." Josephus is 
greatly mistaken when he applies this to the Jews and 
the lake Asphaltites. The monies SSolymi^ are mention- 
ed by poets and historians as being situated in Lycia. 
Homer locates them beyond the ocean; this Strabo I. p. 
39, explains : and if any one will take the trouble of com- 
paring his explanation with these verses, he will not hesi- 
tate to allow that Chserilus alluded to the JSolymi monies 
in Lycia ; and means to describe their situation in con- 
formity with Homer. But it is unnecessary for me to 
say any more after the remarks of such men as Scaliger 
and Bochart, who receive the praises of the editor of Jo- 
sephus in his notes. 

Josephus goes on to other authors, from whom he pre- 
tends to show, not only that the Jews were known to 
other nations, but received from them praises for their wis- 
dom. For this purpose Aristotle is cited ! A great author 
no doubt. In what book, I ask, in what passage ? By 
Clearchus truly, who introduces him in a dialogue speak- 
ing of some wise men, a Jew, of his nation and country. 
Indeed it is very unlikely that Clearchus should be the 
author of that passage, as John Jonsius (de Scriptoribus 
Hist. Phil. I. 18) very learnedly shows. At any rate, it is 
a rash imputation to Aristotle himself, of that which Clear- 
chus feigned in the way of dialogue ; and which was 
never written or spoken by Aristotle. But the fathers 
of the church, according to their usual practice, follow 
Josephus in this quotation also ; and every where boast 
that the wisdom of the Jews had been praised by Aristo- 
tle. Even many recent authors rashly use this authority. 
How well skilled they were in historical criticism will ap- 
pear from this, that the same compositions make Arist< 
himself to have been a Jew ! For it is hardly credi] 
though true, that a learned man like Marcellus Tici 





wyttenbach's opuscula. 19 

(de Christ. Relig. cap. 26) should publish this passage. 
"Clearchus, a peripatetic, writes that Aristotle was a 
Jew !" Carelessness was the source of this shameful mis- 
take, for he misunderstood the Latin version of Josephus, 
and corrupted it by a false punctuation. The Greek runs 
thus, " and this man {says Aristotle) was a Jew:" 
Ticinus reads it, and, says he, Aristotle was a Jew. 
See Jonsius, I. c. p. 116. Palestine, indeed, and the Dead 
Sea, as Jonsius observes, are mentioned by Aristotle in his 
Meteorology, II. 3, but the Jews are mentioned no where 
in the works of Aristotle. 

All the other authors cited by Josephus, are subsequent to 
the time of Alexander ; and therefore require little notice 
on my part. He ascribes much to Hecatseus, who greatly 
praises the Jews. He is grievously offended with Hierony- 
mous, who although he was Quaestor in Syria, and re- 
mained a long time in those parts, he does not speak one 
word about the Jews ; notwithstanding he was a learned 
man, and an historian of Alexander's successors ; a por- 
tion of history in which the Jews might have been intro- 
duced with great propriety. A crowd of authors follow, 
who have mentioned the Jews incidentally ; of these 
authors the names only are mentioned, the passages are 
not quoted ; Theophilus, Mnaseas, Aristophanes, Eume- 
rus, Hermogenes, Conon, Zopyrion : for I have not 
searched (says he) in all the books. Of these, some are 
written after the time of Alexander ; others are so entirely 
unknown, that oblivion would have seized upon their 
names, had they not been rescued by Josephus. If he 
could have gained any credit to his nation from the testi- 
monies which these authors might have famished, he 
would have used them for this purpose, as he did others 
of a very obscure and dubious character. The authors 
who have written on the affairs of Phenicia, Dius, Me- 



« 



20 

nander, are of uncertain authority. Nor does Manetho 
say any thing that certainly relates to the Jews. Finally, 
(II. 16) when he attempts to show that Moses was supe- 
rior to the Greek philosophers, he adds, " Moses and the 
wise men of Greece held the same sentiments as to the 
divine nature ; which they learned from Moses." After- 
wards, explaining the Jewish notions of the divine nature, 
he uses the orphic language, God first, God middle, &c, 
cet. adumbr. conf. IT. 22. 

If then Josephus, a learned man and a Jew, sedulously 
bent upon this question, that he might vindicate for his 
nation antiquity and celebrity with other nations, could 
make out nothing to the purpose, why should I dwell on 
the ecclesiastical fathers, not unlearned indeed, but in 
this respect independent of the authority of Josephus ? If 
Josephus be compared with the writers who succeeded him 
in the same course of investigation, he well deserves the 
praise of modesty. He merely assumes that the Jewish 
name and reputation was not confined to the Jewish 
nation, but was known to other and foreign nations. His 
authority to this point w^ould have been confirmed, if re- 
liance could be placed on his arguments and citations. 
But they prove nothing in support of his position, that the 
name, the religion, and the rites of the Jews were gene- 
rally known abroad. The ecclesiastical fathers, without 
adducing any arguments or authorities of their own, rest 
upon Josephus ; and assert roundly that the Greeks bor- 
rowed their notions of God from the Jews. More modem 
ecclesiastical authors, without knowing any reason for their 
position, defend it equally as if it were self-evident. 
Hence, rashness of judgment keeps pace with ignorance. 
Hence the source of those errors, by which many not un- 
learned men have been deceived ; which would not have 



i 



wyttenbach's opuscula. 21 

been the case, had they applied more diligence in the 
examination. 

My object in this investigation has been, not to bring 
the Jewish nation into contempt, as some have endea- 
vored ; but simply to show, that either no knowledge, or 
knowledge very slight of the Jewish nation, existed among 
other nations foreign to them, previous to the time of 
Alexander the Great. Let us now quit this digression, 
&c, &c, p. 421/ 

Here ends the extract from the learned Wytten- 
bach. Let the clergy refute it if they can. And if they 
cannot, will they still place confidence in the (probably) 
forged writings of such a people ? will they still continue 
to quote them as something of more than human autho- 
rity ? If so, who will they have for their hearers ? for be- 
fore an enlightened and well informed audience, they 
must certainly appear very foolish. Or will they still try 
to defend the wisdom of God in making use of such an ob- 
scure people through whom to make known all his early 
and gracious promises to a dying world ? Credat Judaeus 
Appella : non ego. 

* Alexander the Great died 323 years before the birth of Christ, aged 
32 years. 

Theophrastus died about 388 years before the birth of Christ, aged 85. 

Aristotle died 322 years before the birth of Christ, aged 63. 

Pythagoras died 497 years before the birth of Christ, aged 71. 

Ezekiel, the prophet, nourished about 593 years before the birth of 
Christ. 

Plato died 348 years before the birth of Christ, aged 81. 

Manetho is supposed to have written 261 years before the birth of 
Christ. 

The Jews first became known under Ptolemy Lagus, who overran that 
coast of the Mediterranean ; and when the rage for making collections of 
books and literature took place, at the new built city of Alexandria. Pre- 
vious to the collection of Jewish and Chaldean tracts then made, and trans- 
lated by the Jew translators of the Septuagint, no mention can be found 
in any ancient author of any of the books in the collection now called the 



i 



22 

old testament, or of any of the facts related in them. If any ancient author 
of credit or respectability has mentioned, or cited, or referred to them, who 
is he, and where is the passage 1 They come to us absolutely unaccredited, 
in any way known to history. The Jews were a wandering tribe of Be- 
douin Arabs, who got possession of the sterile country contained within two 
degrees of north latitude, viz. from 31 to 33, and two degrees of east longi- 
tude, (from Greenwich) viz. 35 to 37. Of this they did not occupy the 
more fertile parts on the sea coast, but the interior and sterile portion only. 
Their territory, if any they had, does not appear to have been at any time 
larger than the little state of Delaware, and certainly not containing more 
good land. None of the pieces composing the old testament could have 
been known, till these slaves learned a little reading and writing in Babylon. 
After all, who will answer this question — Where is the authority for them ? 
Upon what evidence anterior to Ptolemy Philadelphus, or about 250 years 
before the birth of Christ, does the authenticity of these books rest ? Are 
the compilers employed by that monarch, (none of them known to the learn- 
ed world,) authority for facts related as having happened a thousand years 
before ? 



% 



A REVIEW 



OF THE EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY 



IN A SERIES OF LECTURES, &C. 



LECTURE I. 

M Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thess. v. 21. 

A most excellent recommendation : and I shall endea- 
vor to obey the injunction of the apostle. In Griesbach 
this verse is connected with the two preceding-, which 
literally read thus : " The Spirit quench not : prophesy- 
ings despise not : but all things explore, [prove or examine] 
the good hold fast." But to obey this injunction, we must 
march into the enemy's camp ; we must storm his strong 
holds, and throw open the brazen gates of his citadel. 

We shall not wage war with either Christ or Christianity, 
so far as either has truth for its foundation. With that reli- 
gion which is " the way, the truth, and the life," we shall 
not wage war ; but we shall pay no respect to names, 
abstractly from the thing named ; and therefore we shall 
pay no respect to the mere name of Christianity, any far- 
ther than we find it has truth for its basis ; but shall treat 
it in the same light as all other dogmas. Let ignorance 
and superstition, bigotry and intolerance, be each at his 
post ; for it is with these, and these alone, we wage war. 



24 LECTURE I. 

Having declared myself independent of all ecclesiasti- 
cal establishments, I shall change my usual style of speak- 
ing, (and, of course, of writing,) and use the first person 
singular, instead of the third, or the first person plural, in 
relation to myself, as I do not wish to make others respon- 
sible for any sentiments, or any facts, advanced by me. 
No one, I will venture to say, has been more sincerely de- 
voted to the truth, has studied more arduously, or more 
faithfully, in order to find it, or has been more honest in 
making his discoveries known to the world, than the indi- 
vidual who now stands before you. But, so it is, whethei 
it must be considered my misfortune or not, just in pro- 
portion as I have made myself acquainted with real 
science — with nature and her laws, if laws they may be 
called — I have had my doubts as to the truth of many 
things recorded in the Bible, not only in the old, but 
also in the new testament. 

These doubts, on fundamental doctrines, first commen- 
ced on reading Dr. Priestley's Disquisition on Matter and 
Spirit, in the summer of 1816, which occasioned my let- 
ters of correspondence with the Rev. Hosea Ballou, now 
of Boston, (Mass.) which have since been published. 
These letters of Mr. B. served to quiet my doubts, at the 
time, though not fully to remove them. 

In the autumn of 1818, I delivered my Lectures on 
the Doctrine of Universal Benevolence, two editions of 
which have been published in Philadelphia, (Penn.) of a 
thousand copies each, and but few of the last edition are 
now remaining on hand. To prepare these lectures, led 
me to study the Hebrew, of which, until then, I had no 
knowledge wnatever. This study was pursued, what 
leisure time I could spare, for more than seven years ; 
during which time I made myself acquainted with various 
versions of the scriptures, (more than twenty of the new tes- 



INTRODUCTION, 25 

ment,) and in several different languages, until I was 
satisfied that I had attained to all the knowledge attain- 
able, which was worth knowing, or which could be attain- 
ed from those sources. My mind still remained dissa- 
tisfied. For, notwithstanding the balance of proof in 
favor of the doctrine of universal salvation — that all shall 
be made alive, gathered together, reheaded, reconciled in 
Christ, are abundant, (though it must be confessed, or at 
least it is true, whether acknowledged or not, that there 
are some texts which will admit of a different construction,) 
yet, the question would come up, "How do Ave know that 
the scriptures themselves are true V The various disputes 
among christians of different denominations never touch 
this question ; as all denominations take it for granted that 
the scriptures are true ; and, therefore, not one out of a 
hundred, perhaps, even of the clergy, much less of the 
laity, ever examine this question. Yea, it is more likely 
to be faithfully and impartially examined by some of the 
laity, who have leisure, and possess the means, than by the 
clergy. The whole combined interest of the clergy, so 
far as their occupation is concerned, is against such an 
examination. It has often been said, and I have made 
use of the same argument myself, that Christianity should 
not be discarded until something better can be proposed in 
its stead. To which I answer, truth is better than false- 
hood, let it be what it may. Therefore, however tempo- 
rary, momentary, or transitory, all truth may be in rela- 
tion to us, yet, being true, it is infinitely better than 
the most sublime, or the most brilliant airy castles which 
have nothing better than the visionary dreams of fanati- 
cism for their support. 

Whatever prophecies there have been made and re- 
corded, whatever miracles there have been wrought in 
former times, these thingvS now rest entirely on human 

3 



26 LECTURE I. 

testimony. Prophecies have long since ceased ; miracles 
are no longer performed ; and we have nothing but his- 
torical evidence that either the one or the other ever took 
place. All the pretended prophecies, which have any 
thing like the appearance of a fulfilment,* might have been 
written long after the facts predicted had taken place, for 
aught we know, or for aught that appears to the contrary; 
and the miracles recorded in the Bible, stand on the same 
evidence, though not so well attested, as some, at least, out 
of the many miracles mentioned in fabulous history. 
What do we know of the ancient Jews, except from his- 
tory ? and what history, except their own, gives us any 
account of them, so far back as the days of their prophets ? 
If such an extraordinary people existed as the Bible gives 
us an account of, is it not strange that they should have 
been unknown to all the other nations in the then civilized 
world? and if they were known, is it not still more 
strange, that no writer, not even Herodotus or Xenophon, 
Pythagoras, Aristotle, Solon, Plato, nor any of the histo- 
rians of Alexander the Great, should have made mention 
of them ? Yet we are told by Wy ttenbach, in his Opus- 
cula, De unitate Dei, vol. II. p. 416 — 431, as published 
in the Correspondent, vol. V. p. 129 and on, (and also 
prefixed to these lectures,) that none of these writers have 
made mention of the Jews, in any of their works which 
have come down to us. Yea, more, that Josephus, in his 
day, notwithstanding he wrote two books on the subject, 
could not find a single writer who had spoken of the 
Jews prior to the days of Alexander. All the Jewish 
records, therefore, which are now considered canonical, 
even by the Jews themselves, come from a people totally 
unknown in the annals of history, inhabiting the interior 

* Except a few conditional prophecies which, like the ancient oracles, 
will answer to one event about as well as another. 



INTRODUCTION. 27 

and sterile part of Palestine, not larger than the little state 
of Delaware. Yet to this people, as both Jews and chris- 
tians believe, was made known the f will of the supreme 
Jehovah ; and among this people, was retained the only 
oracles of God which existed at that time, as acknowledged 
by christians themselves, and on which the Jews, even to 
tliis day, place their only hopes of salvation ! On such 
histories what dependence is to be placed ? There is so 
much fable mixed with the true histories, if any reliance 
can be placed on them at all, that it renders the whole, as 
a whole, of but very little value. 

But, if the facts in the christian scriptures can be sub- 
stantiated, we need give ourselves but little trouble or 
concern about the Jewish records. But the New Testa- 
ment has no more claim to divine authority than the old, 
unless the facts can first be substantiated on the ground of 
history. Till then, the facts must be examined on the 
same ground, and tested by the same process, as all other 
historical facts ; and in no part is the truth of them to be 
taken for granted, merely because they claim to be of 
divine origin. Let the supposed supernatural facts be first 
proved as matters of fact, and then, (as I ,do not belive in 
a supernatural devil, otherwise supernatural facts them- 
selves would be no proof,) but not till then, I am willing to 
yield my assent to them as to their divinity, and of course, 
as to their divine authority ; but without this, they have 
no more claim to divinity, than any thing and every thing 
else. But if the devil has the power of working miracles, 
as some suppose, and as the Bible seems to admit, then, 
even miracles are no proof of the divinity of any thing. 

In these lectures I shall draw largely from a series of 
essays, from an anonymous writer, yet one known to be 
of high literary and moral standing, as published in the 
Correspondent, vol. v. signed " Philo Veritas ;" presuming 



28 



LECTURE I. 



that this writer, as he has seen fit to make his essays pub- 
lic property, will not be displeased that by this means the 
^ knowledge of them % is made still more extensive. I do 
this, because they furnish me with the knowledge of some 
very important facts, which I did not before possess, and 
they refer to authorities to which I have no access ; and 
also, because I like the arrangement, and even where I 
have the authorities, I may as well avail myself of these 
arguments as otherwise ; for, should I attempt any of my 
own, they would not be better expressed. A review of 
these essays, therefore, may properly be called " A Review 
of the Evidences of Christianity." 

" Nothing is wanting to set truth on a firm basis, but 
public attention to public discussion."* The clergy, how- 
ever, if they ever attempt to state the objections to the 
truth of what is alleged in favor of Christianity, never 
state the strongest objections, nor even any in their fullest 
force. Hence, people who hear or read on one side of the 
question only, have but a very poor chance to judge as to 
the real state of the argument. Let the objections then 
be fairly stated ; let them find access to all ears, or let 
them meet every eye, and if the clergy can answer these 
objections let them ; if they cannot, let them acknowledge 
it. I am aware that but a very few, comparatively, have 
given themselves the trouble, and perhaps they have not 
the means, to examine even the " common defences." But 
it is time, as well as the duty of the clergy, to pay more 
attention to this subject : for, " if," says our essayist, 
" when they see the objections of Christianity staring them 

* I shall mark the extracts from the essays in this lecture with quota- 
tions, without any further reference ; and, where I have given the substance 
only, I shall not even do that, as the one general acknowledgment above is 
considered sufficient, and will be satisfactory both to the author of the 
Essays as well as the editor of the Correspondent. 



INTRODUCTION. 



29 



in the face— exposed to the gaze of the public — calling 
on them to defend the system they preach — if, when they 
see and know the difficulties attending their doctrine, they 
pass them by as unworthy of their notice, they are either 
impudent and unprincipled swindlers, taking money un- 
der false pretences, and neglecting their most imperious 
duty; or they profess themselves, unblushingly, the careless, 
hired, prostituted advocates of an indefensible imposture ; 
and they get their living by the public profession of known 
falsehood, defended, on their part, because it conforms to 
the prejudices which, from a misconducted education, 
their hearers have imbibed. It is a base and dishonest 
vocation, thus to obtain ease and luxury ; and" it is be- 
lieved that " a great majority of them know it. Is it not 
high time," therefore, "that the people who pay them 
should know it too? This may be harsh language, but I 
do not acknowledge the claims set up by fraud and false- 
hood to be treated w T ith respect."* 

I propose therefore, in these lectures — 

1. "To investigate the obvious, and common sense 
rules for judging of human testimony ; particularly the 
plain canons of criticism relating to the evidence of 
history. 

2. " To investigate the evidence on which Christianity 
exists, as founded on the passages in Pliny, Tacitus, and 
Suetonius ; the forgeries in Josephus and Longinus have 
had their day. 

3. " To investigate whether there be any, and what 
evidence, for the authenticity of our present gospels over 
cotemporary and acknowledged forgeries. 

* As harsh as this language may seem, it comes from a person whom 
the learned, both as a literary and moral man, dare not treat otherwise 
than with all due respect ; and I presume that the time is not far distant 
when his name may and will be given to the public. 

3* 



30 LECTURE I. 

4. " To show the general character of the ancient fa- 
thers of the christian church, on whose evidence, the 
authenticity of the four gospels now adopted, mainly rests. 

5. " To enquire how far that evidence is binding on 
the men of the present day. 

6. " To compare in a general way, the value of reli- 
gion, with the evils that arise from the abuse of it : and 
to enquire, whether religion," distinct from morality, in 
which case it is only another name for morality, " be 
of any use whatever, in a social community ; and, whe- 
ther prayer, praise, and thanksgiving, when addressed to 
what is called God, or the supreme being," if it be de- 
signed to move him, or persuade him to do what he other- 
wise would not be disposed to perform, " be not mere folly 
and absurdity."* 

Nothing new, therefore, must be expected in these lec- 
tures ; for what can there be offered new on this subject : 
yet, since many religionists, and particularly the clergy, 
are not willing to allow honest scepticism in relation to 
the scriptures ; since the deist, the atheist, the infidel, 
and all others who do not bow down to the golden image 
of orthodoxy, which the clergy have set up, are abused 
more or less every Sunday, in almost every place of wor- 
ship throughout the whole land : it behoves honest men, 
who are opposed to the supremacy of one class of men, 
domineering over the minds and consciences of their fel- 
lows, and who are in favor of maintaining and defending 
not only the civil, but also the religious rights of the peo- 
ple — that of free discussion ; and who maintain that each 

* It will be perceived that I occasionally insert a few words, not 
only with a view of softening the language a little, in some places, but 
also as a kind of stepping-stone, on which I might retreat, should I feel 
disposed to do so. The caution was perhaps a prudent one, but it was 
unnecessary ; I have now not N the least conceivable inclination to return. 
How few there are who know what it is to be mentally free ! 



INTRODUCTION. 31 

and every individual has an unalienable right to think for 
himself, and to speak his own thoughts, to be equally on 
the alert ; and to be " urgent with facts and arguments 
which the clergy are bound to reply to ; and which, they 
cunningly treat with apparent contempt, not because these 
facts and arguments are easily answered, but because the 
hired advocates of imposture know them to be unan- 
swerable. 7 ' 4 

Having thus laid out the work which lays before me, 
the audience may begin to grow impatient to hear the 
facts and arguments to which I have alluded ; but I must 
beg the patience of the hearer. A work once well done, 
is done for always, and is better than to be attempted, but 
miserably balked, a thousand times. I have some desul- 
tory matter to dispose of, in order to pave the way, and 
prepare the mind for the reception of what is to come, and 
therefore, shall not fairly commence the series in this lec- 
ture, which is rather designed as an introduction than 
otherwise, except the heads which I have stated above, and 
which I shall bring forward again in their due order. 

" I have been meditating," says my learned author, " on 
the general practice, adopted, and defended by the most 
learned among the christian fathers, the practice known 
by the name of economia" i. e. management or, in plain 
English, u the practice of forging and lying for the pur- 
pose of promoting the common cause. We can fix this 
by direct evidence, on Origen, Jerom, Eusebius, Chrysos- 
tom ; and so far as the citation of books as genuine, now 
known and acknowledged by all the orthodox to be forge- 
ries, extends, we can fix it on almost every one of the 
drivellers of the second century — men whom Evanson 
very appropriately speaks of, as the ancient mothers, the 
old women of the church. Even Dr. Priestley, devoted as 
he was to his own scheme of unitarian Christianity, could 



32 LECTURE I. 

not help, after Mosheim, lamenting this roguish propensity 
which is so manifest a blemish in the main props and 
pillars of the christian edifice.* What credit is that man 
entitled to, who justifies and practices falsehood and for- 
gery whenever it is likely to serve his purpose ? This 
practice, however, is not without defence from the scriptu- 
ral example ; as the following texts will show." It is true, 
the children of Israel were forbidden to bear false witness 
against their neighbor, that is, against each other ; yet, 
nevertheless, examples of lying, justifying the practice 
from high authority, abound in the scriptures. Thus — 

Num. xiv. 30, 34. " Doubtless ye shall not come into 
the land, concerning which I swore to make you dwell 
therein, save Caleb, the son of Jephunneh ; and Joshua 
the son of Nun. * * * After the number of the days in 
which ye searched for the land, even forty days, each day 
for a year, shall ye bear )^our iniquities, even forty years ; 
and ye shall knoiv my breach of promise." 

Now if God has broken his promise, and even his oath, 
once, what confidence can be placed in him? What 
stronger evidence have w 7 e of the salvation of all men, or 
even of any man, than the promise, the oath of the Al- 
mighty ? " Look unto me, and be ye saved — I have sworn 
by myself — unto me every tongue shall swear — in the 
Lord have I righteousness and strength." &c. Isa. xlv. 22 — 
25. But what confidence can be placed in it ? " Ye shall 
knotv my breach of promise /" Let no one imagine or 
believe that God has ever said this ; but rather that some 
man has said it for him. God is " not a man that he should 
lie !" 

1 Kings, xxii. 22, 23. " I will be a lying spirit in the 
mouth of all his (Ahab's) prophets. And he (the Lord v 

* See Disquisition on Matter and Spirit, vol. 1, page 393, note ; Mo 
eheim's Dissertation, pages 247, 248. 



INTRODUCTION. 33 

said, go and do so." Do how ? Why, go and lie to Ahab ! 
" Now therefore, behold the Lord hath put a lying spirit 
in the mouth of all these prophets." Can any one wonder 
then that Ahab's prophets were liars ? And how do we 
known but that the same god is now performing the same 
lying wonders ? If so, we must not marvel that there are 
so many false prophets and false teachers in the world. All 
the false tales swarming in orthodox tracts, may, perhaps, 
come from the same source. 

Jer. xx. 7. " O Lord, thou hast deceived me, and I am 
greatly deceived." Jer. xv. 8. " Wilt thou be altogether 
to me as a liar, as waters that fail ?" Ezek. xiv. 9. " If a 
prophet is deceived, I the Lord deceived that prophet ; and 
I will stretch out my hand, and destroy him from the 
midst of my people Israel." Might not one well ask here, 
why, what evil hath he done? Will God destroy any man 
for being simply what he has made him to be? or, in 
other words, will God punish his creature for a fault of 
which he himself was the efficient cause ? Far be it from 
me to have such a thought concerning my maker. 

2 Thess. ii. 11. "For this cause God shall send them 
strong delusion that they might believe a lie ; that they all 
might be damned, who believed not the truth." This 
looks to me something like God hardening the heart of 
Pharaoh, and then punishing not only him, but all the 
Egyptians, merely because their king did not still possess 
a soft heart, after the Almighty had hardened it. I am 
aware that it is also said, that Pharaoh hardened his own 
heart ; but it is not at all inconsistent with a system which 
requires lying for its support, to impute the same effect to 
two distinct and different causes ! 

Paul the apostle, on the whole, I believe was not so ex- 
ceptional a character as some have supposed, or else he 
would not have recommended so many good things ; and, 



34 



LECTURE I. 



considering the day in which he lived, I am rather sur- 
prised that we do not find more, instead of less, prevarica- 
tion in his life and conduct. If it be said that he gave 
contradictory accounts of the circumstances of his own 
conversion, this might have been the fault of his biogra- 
pher rather than his own: I cannot charge him with 
lying when he says that he was called in question for the 
resurrection of the dead, though no such charge appears 
against him on record ; yet Paul might have supposed 
that this was the real cause of the Jewish enmity ; for the 
doctrine of the resurrection that Paul preached, basing it 
on the resurrection of Jesus, was very different from that 
which was allowed by the Jews ; even the Pharisees, any 
more than the Sadducees, had no such idea whatever ; 
much less can I make out that he defended " lying on 
system/' as he has been charged : yet, if he was under- 
stood, then, as some are disposed to understand him now, 
we may truly say, "no wonder the ancient tathers were 
led away by his example." The passage brought to prove 
the above charge, is, Rom. iii. 7. "For if the truth of 
God hath more abounded through my lie unto his glory, 
why yet am I also judged a sinner ?" Here, it is supposed, 
Paul justified lying, for the glory of God. But this is not, 
as I conceive, a doctrine, or system, defended by the 
apostle ; but only an objection put into the mouth of his 
opponent, and which is here stated, merely for the sake 
of refuting it ; for he goes on farther to say, ver. 8. " And not 
rather, (as we be slanderously reported, and as some affirm 
that we say,) Let us do evil, that good may come ? whose 
damnation [condemnation] is just." That this doctrine 
was taught in the world, in the apostle's day, and practised 
long afterwards, (and I am not certain that people have 
yet wholly laid aside the jiractice, though I think no one, 
now, would have the hardihood to contend for the princi- 



INTRODUCTION. 35 

pie,) I am very ready to admit; and that some, not fully 
understanding the apostle, nor comprehending his doctrine, 
might charge him with defending the system of lying, for 
the cause of God, is equally true ; for he says, we be 
slanderously reported — " Let us do evil that good may 
come." 5 But he repels the charge with indignation. Rom. 
vi. 1, 2. " What shall we say then? shall we continue in 
sin that grace may abound? God forbid. How shall we, 
that are dead to sin, live any longer therein?" That Paul 
sometimes worked upon the good feelings of his fellow- 
men, in a way that they did not fully see his motives at 
the time, with a view to do th£m good, is very possible ; 
nor do I think it so very reprehensible if he did. For if 
he overcame them by his kindness, by not making him- 
self burdensome to those whom he wished to enlighten 
and instruct, was there any thing wrong in that ? As he 
says, 2 Cor. xii. 16, "Be it so, I did not burden you: 
nevertheless, being crafty, I caught you with guile." Let 
the clergy follow this example, if they choose, and not be 
burdensome to their hearers ; but win as many as they 
can with their kindness ; I have no objection. But when 
Paul goes so far as to curse all who should preach ' any 
other gospel save his own, I cannot go with him. See 
Gal. i. 8, 9. For the credit of the apostle, I should be glad 
to see it proved that either this is an interpolation, or else 
(as in the days of pious fraud, they forged some whole 
books) that this epistle is actually forged.* 

Some would go so far as to charge this practice of pre- 
varication, amounting to nearly falsehood, to Jesus him- 
self. But I see, or think I see, so much good, so much to 
be admired in that character, that so far as these things can 
apparently be made out, I would rather impute them to 

* See also Rom. ii. 16. What gospel did Paul mean by " my gospel," be- 
fore any of the gospels were written 1 



36 LECTURE I. 

his ignorant biographers, who may have misrepresented 
his character in these particulars, than to that worthy 
name I have been so long taught to revere, and have 
looked up to for an example. He says, John vii. 8. " Go 
ye up to this feast ; I go not up," &c. Here, it is said, 
"Aware of the direct falsehood that would otherwise be 
manifest ;" for Jesus afterwards went up, not openly, but 
as it were in secret ; " the clergy have taken care to foist 
in the word oupo instead of ouk. The true reading is, I 
jshall not go up unto this feast. The latest, the most learned, 
the most approved of the editors of the New Testament, 
Griesbach, has settled this question, not to be stirred again. 
He has ascertained the authenticity of ouk, and adopted 
it; and rejected oupo; instead of oupo anabaino, it is 
ouk anabesomai, I shall not go." All the editions of 
Griesbach which I have seen, however, is ouk anabaino, 
I go not ; which may very well admit of wv, now, 
or at present, being understood, and therefore I have 
rendered the passage, " I am not going up to this 
festival, at present ; for my time is not yet fully come." 
But construe the passage as we wilL charity would warrant 
me in saying that he w T as misunderstood, rather than to 
say, he meant to deceive his brethren. But, farther, it is said, 
and this much T fear we shall be obliged to admit, that — 
" Contradictory precepts and examples abound in the 
Bible. Thus, ' honor thy father and thy mother that thy 
days may be long in the land which the Lord thy God 
giveth thee.' Very good. Now, pray, reconcile this with 
the behavior of Jesus Christ to his mother Mary, in re- 
peated instances, of harsh language and reproof. Com- 
pare it with the following text, Luke xiv. 26. ' If any 
man come to me, and hate not his father and mother, and 
wife and children, and brethren, yea, and his own life 
also, he cannot be my disciple.' " I grant the objection 



INTRODUCTION. 37 

here, in all its force ; that is, if these words are to be con- 
strued literally, as meaning just what they say. The only 
apology which can be made is to plead the Hebrew idiom ; 
that the language is comparative ; that the me does not 
mean so much the person of Jesus, as the glorious doc- 
trine which he taught, &c. &c. In this way I can recon- 
cile it tolerably well to my own mind. But, then, how 
few, comparatively speaking, know any thing about He- 
brew idioms ; or what evidence have they that this is a 
Hebrew idiom, except what falls from the priest's lips, 
whose interest in these things may be very different from 
that of the common people ? Would the common peo- 
ple, would children, be likely to put such favorable con- 
structions upon this language? No, they would not. And 
is it not a solemn, but a melancholy fact, that religion, as 
it is generally understood, where it is taught fully up to 
the letter, tends to alienate, rather than to increase the 
affection of even the nearest relations, unless they happen 
to think exactly alike, which is not often the case ? For 
the sake of the unlearned, therefore, I would be in favor 
of expunging all such passages from the book ; or, at 
least, of modifying them so that they would not be so 
likely to mislead the affections of the youthful mind. 

Then, again: "Thou shalt not kill." Very good. 
Why, then, is the Old Testament filled with cruel, re- 
vengeful, murderous commands? Whjr were all the 
women and children, and all the animals on the face of 
the earth, put to death at the deluge, because some of the 
men did not live as God wished them ? Thou shalt kill 
— thou shalt put to death — thou shalt smite with the edge 
of the sword — thine eye shalt not spare — thou shalt surely 
put to death men, women, and children, oxen, sheep, and 
asses ! These commands are so frequent in the Old Tes- 
tament, that it is as unnecessary, as it would be revolting 

4 



38 LECTURE I. 

to our feelings, to recite the passages. " Yet do the [or- 
thodox] clergy, without blushing, and without any scruple 
of conscience, being paid and hired by their ignorant 
hearers, declare these abominable commands to have been 
given by God Almighty f that they were written by holy 
men of old, as they were inspired by the Holy Ghost ; 
" inspired by him, the God of mercy and peace ! Can 
the human imagination imagine any falsehood too gross 
and abominable for these men to utter, when they utter 
such detestable commands as the commands of God ! No 
wonder the [orthodox] Christian religion is a cruel and in- 
tolerant religion, and its priesthood a cruel and intolerant 
priesthood. No wonder, [engines of torture have been 
invented, the most cruel massacres have been executed, in 
the name, and in honor of their God,] when their religion 
engages them to defend these horrid precepts and prac- 
tices !" 

" Thou shalt not commit adultery." Very good. This 
is all right. Let us look at the conduct of the holy men 
of old, in reference to this precept, and let us see how far 
the precept justifies the practice, or the practice was in 
conformity to the precept. Had Moses forgotten the con- 
duct of Abraham and Hagar ; of Lot in his tipsy fro- 
lic ; of Jacob with his two servant maids ; or did he mean 
to impeach the character of his holy ancestors ? I shall 
spare the feelings of my audience, and direct you to the 
Bible for the shameful, or rather shameless practices to 
which I allude. But may I not be permitted to say, that 
David, who is set up in the scriptures as being a man after 
God's own heart, " was the legitimate king of murder 
and adultery V Who can believe the story of Solomon^ 
with his three hundred wives, and seven hundred concu- 
bines ? And, admitting it true, was it a mark either of 
much wisdom, or of much virtue ? And since the clergy 



INTRODUCTION. 39 

will still persist in treating as sacred a circumstance or 
transaction that ought long ago to have been expunged 
from the book, or else the whole book laid aside on the 
account of it, may I not be permitted to ask, without 
offending the delicacy, even if I should wound the feel- 
ings of the orthodox, of any part of my audience, who 
committed adultery, or did any one commit adultery, with 
the young wife of Joseph? To save the credit of the 
scriptures as much as possible, as well as the religion of 
Jesus, I will say, that, in all probability, if such a person 
ever existed, he was " the son of Joseph." John i. 45. 

" Thou shalt not steal " All very well. This is the 
precepi. Now, what was the practice ? The Israelites 
stole, or, rather, borrowed without an intention to return, 
many jewels and other things from the Egyptians. Did 
God authorize them to do so, or not ? Rebecca stole her 
father's household gods. Micah stole some metal and 
made it into gods. Samson killed thirty Philistines for 
the purpose of stealing their garments. David killed two 
hundred Philistines to steal — what ? (1 Sam. xviii. 25 — 
27,) that he might obtain the king's daughter to be his 
wife. 

But I have rehearsed enough of these scriptural contra- 
dictions, though they might have been multiplied to a 
much greater extent. I shall endeavor, in these lectures, 
to lay the axe to the root of the tree ; I shall strike ho- 
nestly and fairly, " by argument such as I believe to be 
in point, and by facts such as I believe incontrovertible," at 
the root of what I conceive to be a long prevailing and 
most pernicious imposture. If the orthodox clergy of 
any sect, for all have more or less orthodox notions ; but if 
the priests of any order can defend their doctrines by open 
and fair discussion, let them do it. " These are not days 
and times when men will willingly pay their money for 



40 LECTURE I. 

unproveable assertions, and sectarian squabbles. The 
strong hold of the priesthood, at this day, consists of the 
females" — I ask pardon of the female part of my au- 
dience ; I consider them as laudable exceptions ; were they 
otherwise, they w T ould not be here ; but they themselves will 
bear witness to the truth of what I am about to remark. I 
say, then, the strong hold of the priesthood, at this day, 
consists of females, " whose weak and uninstructed intel- 
lects the clergy contrive, through fear and through fraud, 
to mislead and govern. Among sensible men there is 
now only one opinion, that priests, and the priesthood, sub- 
sist upon imposture, and are the greatest nuisances that 
society has to complain of." I am perfectly willing to 
admit, that, even among them, also, there are many lau- 
dable exceptions ; but these are only as small wheels, 
moved by the great ones of the large machine. They 
are pleased with their own activity, and think, no doubt, 
that they are doing wonders. But they know neither the 
mechanism nor the structure, much less the operations 
and ultimate object of the whole machine. These are 
doing some good, in their way. But to prevent the perni- 
cious and dangerous tendency of the operation of the 
whole, collectively, it will be necessary to check the pro- 
gress of these also, and teach them a different mode of 
doing good. The greatest peace, happiness, and comfort 
of man, collectively, of man universally, is an object so 
great, so important, and so good, that all other objects 
should be rendered subservient thereunto. In fact, there 
is nothing good, except what is either promotive of, or else 
in perfect unison with, this great and general good. 

Notwithstanding, therefore, there may be much good 
obtained from a knowledge of the scriptures ; notwith- 
standing they are venerable for their antiquity, and curi- 
ous for much of what they contain, yet, after all, " I ask 



INTRODUCTION. 41 

of any honest and well meaning parent, how he can jus- 
tify to himself bringing up his children in reverential be- 
lief of such a book as the Bible? Is there a book in exis- 
tence that contains more filth and more falsehood ? So 
much, that I dare not copy the proofs of my assertion on 
paper, lest the public should cry out against exposing these 
abominations ! To take such advantage as [most ortho- 
dox] parents usually do take, of the infant understandings 
of their offspring, is a gross imposition ; which, when the 
child becomes a man, he will not thank his parent for, if 
he have common sense. It is a sacrifice, for the most 
part, to mere pusillanimity ; the parents are afraid of the 
priests, and, therefore, they sacrifice to the priesthood the 
intellect of their children. 

" If the Christian religion be well founded in its histo- 
rical evidence, a well read person can easily show it. If 
it be not, is it not a base countenance afforded to imposture 
to countenance this religion ? The clergy have been chal- 
lenged often enough to defend themselves ; why do they 
not do it V It is said, that Mr. Campbell has done it ; 
that he has gained a complete victory, yea, a perfect tri- 
umph, over infidelity. I hope so, and, therefore, am very 
anxious to see the work ; but, having seen and read the 
opening and closing address of Mr. Owen, I fear, after all, 
that it will not fully meet the expectations of orthodoxy, 
if any of the clergy are so sanguine as to expect that this 
work will put the disputed point at rest. But the clergy 
have the best chance in the world of doing this if it be in 
their power. " The press is open to them, public encou- 
ragement supports them, public prejudice favors them, they 
are sure of a fair and patient hearing. Why do they not 
come out and defend their Sabbath-day money making ? 
They are accused of Sabbath breaking of the worst kind : 
of receiving money for declaring from the pulpit, every 



42 LECTURE I. 

Sunday, what they do not know to be true, and what they 
[or at least many of them] ought to know to be false. 
Yet they will not let a farmer even make hay when the 
sun shines on a Sabbath day ; this is a privilege they ex- 
clusively reserve to themselves." This is plain talk ; per- 
haps severe ; but its truth only makes it severe. If the 
clergy did not expect to reap some benefit from the people 
being compelled to be idle on the Sabbath, or else to go to 
church, would they be so tenacious about the Sabbath day? 
What is the reason that they, and all who are disposed to 
go and hear them, cannot be just as devout, just as pious, 
just as good, and the people just as well enlightened, edified, 
and instructed, though other people, who do not wish to 
hear them, should be about their secular employments ? It 
may be said, that the noise and bustle of business would 
disturb them. Granted. But why does it not disturb 
them at the dedication of a church, or the ordination of a 
minister ; acts equally solemn in their nature, and which 
are generally performed on a week day ; yet we hear no 
complaint on account of any disturbance or inconvenience 
on these occasions. But the inconvenience would be far 
less on the Sabbath, as there would be far less business 
done, even were the whole to be left to the common cour- 
tesy and common sense of the community, without any 
law on the subject. 

I have, in this discourse, wandered far from the subject 
proposed to be discussed. But these are topics that I wish 
ed to touch upon, and there will be no place where they 
could have come in so well as in this introductory lecture. 
If we must have a religion, I wish to have one that is not 
only rational, but true ; one in which all who feel at all 
religiously disposed, can cordially unite; and in which 
there shall be nothing particularly offensive to any. My 
heart sickens, and recoils within me, when I see so much 



INTRODUCTION. 43 

alienation of feeling among people who would otherwise 
be cordial friends, were it not for some slight difference of 
religious sentiments. I know that I possess none of these 
feelings myself, towards man. woman, or child, on account 
of any difference in our religious views ; and could I find 
a corresponding feeling, and other circumstances being 
agreeable, I could sit down and converse just as cheerfully, 
and just as pleasantly, with those who should differ ever 
so widely from me, as I could with a person exactly of my 
own sentiment. Yea, of the two, I should take a deeper 
interest, as I should hope that the conversation would be 
more likely to do good. 

My next lecture w r ill treat on the nature of evidence. It 
will be important for those who mean to hear the evidences 
themselves, that they should also hear these preliminary 
discourses ; otherwise they will not be so capable of judg- 
ing of the evidence when they hear it. 

I shall close this lecture in the language of a late wri- 
ter, the author of the Essays, I suspect, though in a later 
work. " Never, never will mankind be at peace — never, 
never wall a mild and benevolent morality take place of 
malignant intolerance, and money-making pretensions to 
piety, until we get rid of that greatest of all earthly nui- 
sances, A HIRED AND PAID PRIESTHOOD. 

" In Great Britain the same sentiments are fast gaining 
ground. A few months ago, (1828,) a book of great va- 
rious learning, and uncommon research, entitled the Cel- 
tic Druids, by Godfrey Higgins, Esq., quarto, was pub- 
lished in London. It is a work that ranks high in the 
profound literature of the day. I copy the concluding 
paragraph of that work, with which, I have no doubt, 
many of my readers will agree. It shows the opinions 
beginning to prevail among the learned in Great Britain. 
It is from page 299. ' Of all the evils that escaped from 



44 LECTURE I. 

Pandora's box, the institution of priesthoods was the 
worst. Priests have been the curse of the world. And if 
we admit the merits of many of those of our own time, 
to be as pre-eminent above all others as the esprit de corps 
of the most self-contented individual of the order may 
incite him to consider them, great as I am willing to allow 
the merits of individuals to be, I will not allow that they 
form exceptions strong enough to destroy the general na- 
ture of the rule. Look at China ; at the festival of Jag- 
gernaut ; the Crusades ; the massacres of St. Bartholo- 
mew, of the Mexicans, and the Peruvians ; the fires of 
the inquisition ; of Mary, Cranmer, Calvin, and of the 
Druids ! Look at Ireland ; look at Spain ; in short, look 
every where, and every where you will see the priests 
reeking with gore. They have converted populous and 
happy nations into deserts ; and have transformed our 
beautiful world into a slaughter house, drenched with blood 
and tears !' " 



LECTURE n. 

" Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thes. v. 2L 

[For what I shall advance in this lecture I am almost 
wholly indebted to " Philo Veritas," (for so I call my learn- 
ed friend, it being the name attached to the Essays, and 
the most conspicuous by which he is yet known to the 
public,) and, therefore, shall not think it necessary to give 
credit for any thing except what I finci quoted by him. 
The audience will readily perceive it, should I advance 
any thing of my own. The subject now before us is,] 

HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 

The*means of arriving at truth, whether as to past 
k facts of history, or past facts in the common occurrences 
of life, are the same ; and whether they relate to the pay- 
ment of a sum of money, or the progress of a revolution, 
we must depend on the relation of witnesses, or written 
documents, or on the reasonable conclusions afforded by 
ascertained collateral facts ; that is, on circumstantial evi- 
dence. The rules of judging of the value of the evi- 
dence offered, is the same, whatever be the object of en- 
quiry. 

Courts of justice are so much in the habit of discussing 
the value of evidence offered, that there are a set of rules 
adopted by the common consent of all legal writers on the 
subject, which may be regarded as the canons of evidence. 
In the British and the American courts, these rules have 
been laboriously established by repeated discussion, and 



46 LECTURE II. 

trials of their utility. Nor has any branch of the law attract- 
ed more (if so much) attention as the law of evidence. It 
did not begin to be systematically treated in England till 
the time of Chief Baron Gilbert. The compilations on 
the subject in the old digests, were meagre, and far from 
being adequate to the decision of the numerous cases that 
the prodigious extent of dealing within the last half century 
has given rise to. Buller's Elementary Treatise on the Law 
of Nisi Prius : was the first book that showed the neces- 
sity of strict attention to the rules of evidence, and the 
practice of examination and cross-examination.* 

1. We are not to expect in history the same accuracy as 
we observe in a court of justice. In history, the historians 
are voluntary narrators ; they do not write as a witness 
speaks, under compulsion. 2. We never know precisely the 
real motives that actuate a historian to write. 3. We have 
no means of exercising the valuable privilege of oral exami- 
nation, or the invaluable privilege of cross-examination. 
4. He has it in his power, without being called to account, 
unless by laborious criticism, a science yet in its infancy, to 
adduce what testimony he pleases, to cull out what may suit 
his purpose, to give it the complexion that suits his own 
views, and to omit, if he pleases, documents that would 
be troublesome to obtain or examine. On all these points, 
a court of justice, with their means and appliances, have 
greatly the advantage of a reader of history. Still there 
are rules and canons established by common sense and ex- 
perience, that are common to the honest searcher after 

* For the books used, and the authorities referred to, on this subject, see 
the essays of Philo Veritas, as published in the fifth volume of the Corres- 
pondent. These lectures are designed for popular reading. Not one out 
of a thousand has access to many of the works referred to, were the refe- 
rences given. They are useful to the learned reader only. This general 
reference, therefore, is deemed sufficient for the common reader. Let the 
facts be controverted and refuted if they can be. 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 47 

truth, whether in a cause before a court, or in the page of 
the historian. 

And, first, of the testimony of witnesses. 

1. Objections to the credit — to the competency — that 
is, to the propriety of a witness being examined at all, are, 
in modern practice, narrowed down to, 1. Exclusions by 
positive law for infamy ; 2. Exclusions for heterodoxy ; be- 
coming gradually much out of fashion ; [and ought never 
to be admitted at all ;] 3. Exclusions from interest in the 
result or event of the cause before the court ; 4. Exclu- 
sions, where the examination, if answered, would unfairly 
compel the witness to criminate himself. 

All other objections apply, not to his credit, competency, 
or admissibility, but to his credibility only ; they impeach 
the value of his testimony, and furnish reason for defalca- 
tion from the respect otherwise due to it. Among the 
grounds of absolute exclusion, however, are, " all offences 
founded in fraud, and which come within the general no- 
tion of the crimen falsi of the Roman law ; as perjury, 
forgery, piracy, swindling, and cheating." 

2. All evidence is either direct or presumptive. Direct 
evidence may be either impugned, or confirmed by other 
direct evidence, and also by presumptive evidence. Direct 
evidence is where the facts in dispute are communicated 
by those who have had actual knowledge of them by 
means of their own senses. Presumptive evidence is 
where a fact is not directly and positively known and tes- 
tified, but is inferred as a reasonable conclusion from other 
collateral facts or circumstances connected with it, and 
which are known. It frequently happens, that no direct 
and positive evidence can be had ; and often, where it can 
be had, it becomes necessary to try its weight and accu- 
racy by means of the presumptions arising from surround- 
ing circumstances, with which it mav be comoared. The 



48 LECTURE I. 

want of written documents, the fallaciousness of the hu- 
man memory, the great temptations which perpetually oc- 
cur to exclude the true, the suppression of true, and the 
fabrication of false testimony, render it necessary to call in 
every aid for ascertaining the truth. 

3. Our natural reason for believing the declarations of 
others — for, giving credit to human testimony, is our con- 
stant observation and experience, that we, and other men, 
who have no reason for suppressing or disguising the 
truth, or for saying what is false, usually tell truth, and 
not falsehood. Therefore, from experience and observa-- 
tion of ourselves and others, we repose confidence in the 
veracity of others, when we see no reason why we should 
not do so. We refuse credit to men of bad character — to 
men known to be guilty of falsehood — to men who are in- 
terested to suppress or disguise the truth, because experi- 
ence teaches us, that we cannot place confidence in what 
such men say. Doubts of their veracity have, in our 
minds, been associated with their declarations and narra- 
tions. 

If our neighbor tells us of some very extraordinary 
circumstance, not conformable to our previous experience 
in relation to it, we consider whether our neighbor is a man 
of veracity generally ; whether he has any motive to de- 
ceive us in this instance ; whether he may not be deceived 
himself, and liable to mistake in some way or other, and 
we reason with ourselves which is most consonant to our 
past experience, that the fact related should be true, or 
that he should, from some cause unknown to us, be de- 
ceived himself, or, from some motive unknown to us, be 
induced to vary from the truth. Hence, although common 
and usual testimony is sufficient to establish common and 
usual facts ; yet, facts strange, unaccountable, uncommon, 
cannot be substantiated on merely common evidence ; they 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 49 

require a proportional strength of testimony to overcome 
objections founded on our previous experience of the im- 
probability of such facts. 

4. So, as to presumptive evidence ; being accustomed 
to observe, that like antecedents are attended with like 
consequents, (to use Dr. Brown's phraseology,) we are apt, 
by the constitution of our nature, to infer the latter from 
the former. Hence our belief in the connexion between 
motive and action, and our habitual attempts to explain 
the one by the other. When certain motives and certain 
actions have been long associated in our minds as the re- 
sult of our observation and experience, we are naturally 
led to associate them in fact, and in practical reasonings, 
Hence, the investigation of the motives that lead a man to 
act thus or thus, is always an important point of judicial 
enquiry, particularly in cases of crime. 

5. Presumptions in civil cases may arise from great ne- 
glect — from the urging of dormant claims — from the offer- 
ing of inferior, instead of the best testimony — from omis- 
sion to produce evidence easily attainable, or in the par- 
ty's power — from his having any interest in the cause, or 
in the question to be determined — from his connexion 
with any of the parties — from any bias arising from esprit 
de corps, [party spirit,] religious or political ; if he has to 
give testimony of, or against his religious sect, or his po- 
litical party, it is hardly possible that his testimony should 
not be tinged, or warped, by these very strong motives of 
bias. Presumptions may also arise from character and 
station m society — from known habits — from occupation, 
and from various other circumstances. All these pre- 
sumptions are founded on general observation and experi- 
ence, and are, therefore, fair topics of reasoning before we 
form a conclusion. 

6. Hearsay evidence cannot be heard ; that is, it is not 

5 



50 LECTURE II. 

admissible in a court of justice. A court and jury must 
decide on reasonable certainty. Even where the veracity, 
the perfect knowledge from all opportunity of observation, 
the good sense and good character, and the freedom from 
bias of a witness is undoubted, doubts may yet arise on 
his testimony. [Even the most unprejudiced eye wit- 
ness, may not see, or he may not observe, all the cir- 
cumstances ; hence the testimony of a good witness may 
be much weakened by the testimony of others equally 
good.] Much more, when we are utterly at a loss as to 
the character, the means of information, the veracity, the 
freedom from bias, the attentive and accurate observation 
of the original witness, w^hose evidence is retailed to us at 
second hand in a general way. Above all, there are no 
means of sifting out the truth, and giving due weight to 
objections by cross-examination, that invaluable preserva- 
tive against error in testimony. Nor are we able to tell 
whether the hearsay witness before us, was himself atten- 
tive, accurate, faithful, impartial, and on the alert to get 
rid of error in the relation of his informant. Moreover, 
to let in hearsay testimony, is to let in all hearsay testimo- 
ny of persons, however careless, however free from all ob- 
ligation as to accuracy, or even to truth in their narrations. 
It would be to let in all loose and idle clamor, report, and 
tittle-tattle, unsifted, unexamined, unweighed. And yet, 
how much is all known history liable to this most fatal 
objection ! Shall I read you some book of history, said 
his son to Sir Robert Walpole at his last illness ? History 
— no ; I have done with all works of fiction, and such is 
history. 

For great and prominent features, for all transactions 
in themselves probable, for the usual course and current of 
events, history may be quoted ; but where is it built on the 
evidence of unbiassed eye-witnesses 1 Suppose a man of 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 51 

good sense and veracity present at the battle of Waterloo, 
were to give me an account of what passed on that event- 
ful day, how little could he tell from his own knowledge ! 
how liable were his senses to be deceived ! In the Albion 
of March 28, 1829, is an account of the battle of Wa- 
terloo by an eye-witness, well told. There is in it this pas- 
sage, " Are the French coming, sir, said I to a wounded 
Scotch officer 3 Egad, I cannot tell, replied he, we know 
nothing about it ; we had enough to do to take care of our- 
selves. An English lady, elegantly attired, now rushed 
forward : is my husband safe ? cried she, eagerly. Good 
God, madam, replied one of the men, how can we tell ? 
I do not know the fate of those who were fighting by my 
side, and I could not see a yard around me." History 
being thus liable to false information, to imperfect and in- 
accurate information, to the information of those who may, 
with perfect impunity, be intentionally false ; or who may 
be vague, or inaccurate, or careless, or indifferent — who 
may substitute surmises for facts, or who may see every 
thing through a mist of prejudice springing up from vari- 
ous sources — how necessary is it to require every precau- 
tion to be taken in obtaining original, first rate informa- 
tion ; in ensuring truth and accuracy, free from suspicious 
motives of personal or party interest, before we place any 
confidence whatever in the account. To rest our faith on 
second hand, careless, contradictory, inaccurate relations, 
bearing, upon the face of them, want of authenticity, 
want of truth, want of accuracy, and obvious partiality, 
is leaning our weight on a broken reed. It is what every 
court of justice, in every civilized country upon earth, 
would reject, if a dollar were at issue upon it. 

Even where the question before the court and jury is 
this, does any tradition exist of the fact alleged ? the 
tradition is required to be general, to be of a public nature, 



52 LECTURE II. 

to be uniform, consistent, uncontradicted, derived from 
persons likely to know the facts, free from suspicion, and 
reasonable. 

7 " One of the most important rules" on this subject 
is, that the best u attainable evidence should be adduced 
to prove every disputed fact. All secondary and inferior 
evidence must be rejected, when it is attempted to be sub- 
stituted for evidence of a higher and superior character or 
nature." For this substitution may reasonably be sus- 
pected to arise from sinister motive, and from apprehen- 
sion that the best evidence, if produced, would alter the 
case to the prejudice of the party who attempts to substi- 
tute evidence of an inferior grade. There are no excep- 
tions to this rule substantially : all the apparent exceptions 
are consistent with the plain meaning of the rule itself; 
which enjoins the production of the best and most unex- 
ceptionable evidence that could have been produced or 
offered, under the circumstances of the case : as a man's 
own acts or writings are to be produced, if they are in ex- 
istence, and no other evidence of them or their contents 
can be given. No copy of a deed is admissible, if the 
deed itself be in existence and attainable. General Eaton 
has written and published an account of General Jackson 
and his campaigns. Suppose it to contain conversations 
and opinions of G. J., and that General Eaton had sup- 
pressed it purposely till General Jackson was dead ; would 
it have been equally authentic ? Would it not be said, 
why not publish this while he was living, that these con- 
versations and opinions might have been treated as being 
true, or not true, when attributed to that gentleman ? So, 
in the conversations, doctrines, and sayings, attributed to 
Jesus Christ, the best evidence the nature of the case 
would admit of, would have been his own account of his 
doings, or his own authentication of the accounts given 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 53 

by other persons. This might have been done with ease; 
why was it left undone? Or why are we required to 
give implicit credit to second-hand evidence? 

8. Where evidence on one side is positive, on the other 
negative, the positive testimony is preferable, as a general 
rule. Thus, if one witness of sufficient credibility, swears 
that he heard or saw a fact, and another witness, equally 
creditable, swears he was present at the time, and neither 
heard or saw it, this is no contradiction, unless the fact 
itself, and the situation of the last witness were such, that 
he could not possibly avoid seeing or hearing it. For in- 
stance, the accounts given of the life, conduct, condemnation, 
death, resurrection of Jesus Christ — the darkness and earth- 
quake that took place — the rending of the veil of the tem- 
ple, the rising of the dead from their graves, all matters of 
great public notoriety, forming a part of the Jewish his- 
tory of that day — circumstances in themselves not only of 
great publicity, but of most extraordinary character, could 
not [as I conceive] be passed over unnoticed by any co- 
temporary writer of transactions at Jerusalem at that time ; 
yet, neither Philo, who probably was there at the time, or 
Josephus, [who was born but two years after the cruci- 
fixion,] take the slightest notice of any of these extraordi- 
nary facts. Men of learning, of research, and themselves 
Jews, acquainted minutely with Jewish history, could not 
have omitted noticing transactions so extraordinary and so 
recent, had they really happened. 

9. Where the evidence is direct, and conflicting, the 
effect is destroyed on both sides, like positive and negative 
quantities in algebra of equal value. If their values be 
unequal, the best evidence must preponderate. 

10. In [common cases, of no great moment, we may 
reasonably pronounce in conformity to a slight preponde- 
rance of evidence : but in cases of magnitude, or where 

5* 



54 



LECTURE II. 



much is at stake, this is not justifiable. The preponde- 
rance that would justify awarding a few dollars, would not 
suffice to put a man to death as a criminal, or to subject 
him to imprisonment, or even to the loss of character. 

11. The corruption, subordination, or fabrication of 
evidence, deeply affects that side of the question it is in- 
troduced to support. " As the credit due to a witness, is 
founded in the first instance on general experience of 
human veracity, it follows that a witness who gives false 
testimony as to one particular, cannot be credited as to 
any ; according to the legal maxim, falsum in nno, fal- 
sum in omnibus. The presumption that a witness will 
speak the truth, ceases, so soon as it manifestly appears 
that he is capable of perjury." 

[What shall we say, then, to a cause supported at its 
commencement by fifty gospels, forty-six of which, at 
least, are forgeries, and are so acknowledged ? And by 
regular professors of falsehood and forgery, such as Ori- 
gen, Eusebius, Jerom, and Chrysostom ?] 

12. Bias from personal friendship or enmity — consan- 
guinity — mutuality of interest — connexion in the way of 
trade or profession, are to be taken into the account. None 
of these are stronger than the bias arising from member- 
ship, esprit de corps > particularly in case of religious sects 
or parties. Even those who care nothing about religion, 
care about the sect which they have joined : nor is there 
any fraud or falsehood that religious persons, or persons 
pretending so to be, have scrupled to employ, to promote a 
common cause. The history of Christianity, from the mira- 
cles of the first century, to the miracles of Prince Hohen- 
loe, furnish proofs in superabundance of this position ; proofs 
impossible to be contradicted : because the passions of his 
sect are much stronger and more influential than his own. 

13. In the examination of human testimony, then, we 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 55 

enquire who is the witness, what is his character, what his 
situation in life, whether he has any bias on his mind that 
may warp his testimony, whether he has any interest of 
his own or others to serve, that may produce the same 
effect. Whether he had sufficient time and opportunity 
to observe the fact he testifies ; whether he is of sufficient 
judgment, caution, and accuracy, to induce us to place a 
reliance on his narration. If deficient in any of these 
particulars, we must defalk proportionably from his credi- 
bility. It is self-evident that all these particulars apply to 
historical testimony. If the historian does not relate the 
fact on his own credit and authority, but on that of ano- 
ther, he ought, at least, to furnish us \\ ith the means of 
judging how far the preceding objects of enquiry apply to 
the authority he relies on. 

14. Hence, a historian who does not accurately quote 
his authority for a fact, when it rests on his own testimo- 
ny, is utterly unworthy of credit in the case in question. 
It is his duty to enable us to judge of the value of the 
testimony on which his facts rest. A history wherein the 
authorities are not accurately cited, can never be quoted ; 
nor ought it to find a place in any well selected library. 

To apply this : Who wrote the four gospels now used 
by christians? In what language originally? When 
were they written? Where were they written? What 
measures were taken to ascertain their comparative au- 
thenticity? Is there a clergyman living who can give 
satisfactory answers to these questions ? No : there is not. 
Yet are not these enquiries to the last degree important to 
Christianity ? Are not all the books of the Old Testament 
open to the same enquiries ? 

15. No historian is worthy of credit, whose history con- 
tains gross anachronisms ; allusions to facts of subsequent 
date ; or to customs of subsequent date ; or who employs 



56 LECTURE II. 

words, expressions, and phrases, not conformable to the 
time of which he speaks. Such anachronisms furnish 
irrefutable objections to the authenticity of any anciei 
work. The anachronisms of the Pentateuch are numer- 
ous and glaring : there are many also in the New Testa- 
ment. Let us suppose a play, published as Shakspeare's, 
contained allusions to the American war: is not that 
enough to destroy all claim to authenticity ? 

16. A writer in Walsh's review, in treating of the Ho 
meric poems, in a review of Wolfs Prolegomena, about 
a twelve month ago, shows clearly that the materials for 
writing any history, or long work, did not exist previouslj 
to the use of the Egyptian papyrus.* Of which, proba- 
bly, Herodotus was the first historian who did make use. 
It was not common till the time of the Ptolemies. This 
point of historical criticism, appears to me of sufficient 
importance to be considered ; and, unless it be refuted, it 
will make sad havoc with many supposed ancient works. 
Indeed how can the Pentateuch be written on plaistered 
stones, the only method of writing known to Moses? 
(Deut. xxvii. 1.) or on Babylonish bricks, or sheets of 
copper or lead ; or cow hides ; or on blocks or sticks of 
wood ; or on w^axen linen, or wooden tablets ? It is a farce 
to talk of a long history written on such materials : men 
who gravely tell us this, may be men of learning, but 
they have no more common sense than will serve their own 
purposes, and scarcely that. 

Who ever cited any one of the books of the Old Tes- 
tament before the Septuagint appeared ? Their very first 
appearance was not till papyrus was in common use at 
Alexandria : then, and not before, we hear of the Septua- 

* A kind of reed of which the Egyptians made paper. It was not used 
more than 500 years before the Christian era. Review, Vol. II. p. 307. 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 57 

gint. But where is the authority for the originals of the 
Septuagint ? Who can tell ? 

17. I have already noticed, that in proportion as a fact 
is in itself credible because conformable to human experi- 
ence under the circumstances connected with it, the weight 
of testimony necessary to establish it, is less. In propor- 
tion as a fact is in opposition to human experience, the 
weight of evidence necessary to establish it, must be 
greater. For the analysis of the problem, results in this ; is 
it more improbable, that the fact should be true as related, 
or the witnesses should be deceived, or should have some 
motive for deceiving ? Wherever a very extraordinary fact 
is related, even by concurrent testimony, we are to consider 
whether the witnesses had any bias of self-interest or 
family interest, or any party purpose, of religion or politics 
to serve. For such sources of incorrectness, as we know 
from long, indeed from constant, and universal experi- 
ence, are very apt to stand in the way of truth, and tempt 
to forgery, falsehood, and fraud. Take for examples, the 
Sibilline prophecies, the miracles of Apollonius Tyaneus, 
or the miracles of the three first centuries of the christian 
church ; take, in more modern times, any of the popish 
legends ; or take the miracles at the tomb of the Abbe 
St. Paris ; those within these few years performed at St. 
Winifred's Well, published by Dr. Milner; or the miracles 
of Prince Hohenloe. We see clearly the temptation, and 
the resulting temptation in all these cases. The testimo- 
nies to the death and resurrection of Christ, are liable to a 
similar objection : there is not one disinterested witness 
specified. All the disciples lived at their ease, upon this 
lucrative story, [and, except what persecution they met 
with from the Jews, which may have been much exagge- 
rated,] maintained in plenty, and respected by their igno- 
rant followers. Even his brothers and sisters, who disbe- 



58 



LECTURE II. 



lieved and ridiculed his pretensions before he was put to 
death, joined his travelling disciples, and lived at their 
ease on christian credulity, after his decease. " Have we 
not," says St. Paul, (1 Cor. ix. 5.) "power to eat and 
drink ? Have we not power to lead about a sister, or wife, 
as well as the other apostles, and as the brethren of our 
Lord ? and Cephas ? or I only and Barnabas ? If we 
-sow unto you spiritual things, is it a great thing that we 
should reap of you carnal things ?" 

Men thus subsisting by an alleged imposture, are very 
suspicious witnesses to establish the truth of the facts de- 
nied. Would any court of justice let such evidence go to 
a jury? [I must confess, I never viewed this subject so 
fully in this light before. The main fact has been always 
assumed, rather than proved : it has been taken for grant- 
ed, that the apostles were inspired men ; hence, they have 
been allowed to testify in their own case ; or others have 
been allowed to testify for them, and in their name, what- 
ever would suit their own purpose.] 

I am fully aware of the difficulty attending the ques- 
tion, what is a miracle ? I am aware that we must be 
very cautious in pretending to know the extent of the laws 
of nature. Thus, very many tricks of a juggler, appear to 
persons ignorant of the deception, to be miraculous. The 
king of Siam was half justified in rejecting the story of 
w r ater becoming solid, as contrary to universal experience 
in his climate and country. Mr. Robinson, in his exa- 
mination of the authenticity of the Parian Chronicle, 
(the Oxford or Arundelian marbles,) states it as a conclu- 
sive objection, that they relate the impossible fact of a 
large stone falling from the heavens into the Egean Sea : 
a fact, that since our attention has been drawn to meteo- 
rolites by M. Chladni, and Mr. Howard, nobody scruples 
to believe. [So prone are sensible men to believe, without 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 59 

the most indubitable evidence, except what is in some 
way connected with religion or superstition, that many 
well known facts now, had they formerly been related, 
would not have been received as truth.] As the diving 
bell, the balloon, the many strange modes of producing 
fire and flame by the chemical operation and intermixture 
of cold liquors — the firing of gunpowder by a drop of water, 
by means of potassium — the conversion of potass into a 
metal like silver — the deceptions of phantasmagoria, &c. 
would formerly have been rejected as fabulous even by 
sensible men, because not coincident with any one's anterior 
experience. Every step in the progress of knowledge, de- 
creases the number of facts that would formerly be regarded 
as miraculous, and renders them more credible than here- 
tofore. 

Still, there are innumerable facts, which we know, with 
sufficient certainty, to transcend the powers of man, and 
the observed laws of nature : and we have a right to say 
that the force of univeral observation and experience would 
justify us in rejecting them at once, because no testimony 
of any dozen or other number of witnesses, can overcome 
the overwhelming weight of universal experience in every 
country and in all ages. 

For instance, suppose witnesses were produced to prove 
that a man really dead and buried for four days, being dug 
up and touched with the relic of a saint of the holy Ro- 
man catholic church, was instantly brought up into full 
life, health, and activity — what number of witnesses 
would be required to prove this fact ? Is 2 Kings, xiii. 21. 
sufficient ? Is the resuscitation of Lazarus, or of Jairus's 
daughter, any different. 

The Rev. Mr. Forsyth, a man of taste, talent, and 
learning, in his remarks on Italy, p. 344, gives an account 
of a withered elm-tree in the Piazza del Duomo at Flo- 
rence, being suddenly restored to vegetation by the body 



O. LECTURE II. 

of Saint Zenobio resting against its trunk. " This event 
happened when Florence was more populous than now, 
and the most enlightened city of Europe : it happened in 
the most public place of the whole town : in the presence 
of many thousands then attending the solemn removal 
of the saint from San Lorenzo to the cathedral. The 
event is recorded by cotemporary historians, and is inscri- 
bed on a marble column, now standing where the tree 
stood. A column erected in the face of those very per- 
sons who saw the miracle performed, and who certainly, if 
the miracle w T ere false, would not suffer so impudent a 
story to insult them." Why not, Mr. Forsyth ? Would not 
every prudent person on such an occasion say, what busi- 
ness is it of mine ? Why should I buffet a stone wall, and 
make myself the certain victim of clerical indignation and 
revenge, by exposing this clever piece of priestcraft ? Mr. 
Forsyth says, this miracle puzzles him, although be 
acknowledges it is exactly the same with the oak at Cape- 
ra, which burst into leaf the instant Augustus set his foot 
on that island ! What man would be blockhead enough to 
convince a Neapolitan multitude that the liquifaction of 
the blood of St. Januarius was a clumsy trick? Would 
any body have been puzzled about the withered elm but 
a clerical narrator like the Rev. Mr. Forsyth ? 

Is there any ancient or modern relations [those in the 
Bible not excepted] so fully and completely authenticated, 
as the miracles of the tomb of the Abbe Paris ? I have 
two volumes, [says Philo Veritas] (one in quarto, with 
plates of the transactions) of the miracles and the proces 
verbales. Yet the king ended the delusion at once ; 

De part le Roi : defense a Dieu, 
De faire miracles dans ce lieu.* 

So, in the case of Prince Hohenloe, when the pope be- 

* The king commands, that God shall not 
Work more miracles on this spot. 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 61 

gan to blush for the publicity of these silly impostures, 
the prince could perform them no longer. 

Produce as many ancient witnesses as you please for 
Pythagoras's golden thigh : will any assignable number 
suffice to substantiate the fact ? 

Suppose a man [said to have been] born blind, should 
have his eyes anointed by another man with dirt and 
spittle, and then washing it off in a particular pond of 
water, should instantly be restored to sight : what force of 
testimony would induce a reasonable man in the present 
day to believe this ? 

Whenever a [supposed] miraculous fact is presented and 
exhibited to a multitude of spectators, it is nothing but a 
dexterous deception — an apparent violation of a law of 
nature, where some circumstance is concealed, which 
when known would explain the whole, like the phantas- 
magoria of our public exhibitions. [Or, like the powers 
of Ventriloquism, very extraordinary exhibitions of which 
I witnessed in Mr. Nichols, but a few evenings ago.*] 

Let us suppose, for instance, the permanent cure of some 
disease. This is open, you say, to judicial testimony; the 
witnesses can say whether the patient was ill, when, and 
at what time, on what occasion, and in what maimer he 
was treated and cured. No doubt all this can be testified. 

* The following is from the handbill, among many others equally striking 
and amusing. 

" Mr. Nichols will give imitations of different sounds, such as the saw- 
ing of wood, pouring of wine, drawing of corks, music of the Jews harp, 
&c. ; will hold an amusing tete-a-tete with an old gentleman of the 
name of Count Piper, and his little son, representing himself, uncle 
Ben, and two servants, Peter and Jack, in the kitchen below, and an 
amusing old Lady singing under the floor, together with the crying of 
three children, apparently in great distress. In this scene there are eight 
voices, besides the three children. 

" He will throw his voice into the body of any gentleman present, and 
seemingly hold a familiar conversation with him." 

6 



62 LECTURE II. 

But what court of justice has the means, the criterion of 
distinguishing a natural from a miraculous cure ? More- 
over, there are six other considerations to be weighed before 
the miraculous cure can be ascertained. 1. Was there 
a real malady, or such a one as is pretended. The symp- 
toms may be imagined. 2. Was there any illness at all. 
3. The illness may have been cured by other means than 
the pretended ones. 4. Or it may have passed away na- 
turally. 5. Or it may be alleviated only, or suspended. 
6. It may continue unalleviated, while a falsehood is told 
of its cure, either by the patient or the operator. 

Unless all these points are accurately examined and as- 
certained, there is no certainty : now, in what case has 
this ever been done? In what case has due care and 
precaution been taken to remove all reasonable doubt or 
suspicion ? Has it been done in any Christian case, either 
of the four gospels or popish legends ? Never. Let me 
see such a case verified by a sufficient number of unex- 
ceptionable witnesses, with all precautions to remove 
fraud or error, and with all the forms that a court of jus- 
tice deems absolutely necessary to arrive at truth. With- 
out this last condition — by extra judicial testimony — taken 
ex parte — unconfronted — not cross-examined — not ob- 
served upon — any case of witchcraft, or possession, might 
be, as in a crowd of instances they have been proved. 
What is it that has caused such an impression for so 
many ages of the truth of miracles, ghosts, apparitions, 
magic, witchcraft, &c. &c. ? It is, that the more there is 
of this supernatural belief, the more necessary do the im- 
postures of the priesthood become: the public are per- 
suaded by the priests that all these things exist, and that 
religion is necessary to control or counteract them. How 
many persons would gladly disabuse mankind. But man- 
kind will not be disabused. Mankind is an ass, says the 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 63 

Spanish proverb, who kicks those who endeavor to take 
off his paniers. Reason might combat these errors, per- 
haps, but the people, persuaded by the priesthood, will not 
have them combatted. Reason is accused of impiety, and 
condemned to death. With what rancor — with what deep 
seated malignity is every attempt to correct superstition re- 
ceived in this country at this moment ! How miserably 
ignorant and bigoted are even our own legislators in this 
most enlightened country upon earth ! 

Suppose a proof were offered that a person in their ckh 
thing, well examined, being locked up in a room, with 
thick and strong walls, the windows fully secured, and 
the door locked, bolted and barred with every precaution 
of security, and that there being really no aperture for 
escape, by the chimney or otherwise, yet that the person so 
confined was seen a few minutes after walking the streets 
a mile off. Would a judge be authorized to refuse receiv- 
ing such testimony ? Assuredly : for the counter testimony 
of every one's experience, that such a case could not, and 
never did happen within any one's knowledge or memory, 
would be too strong for any positive evidence in support of 
it to overthrow. [Either there must have been some mis- 
take about the man having been actually locked up in the 
room, or else some mistake about his having been seen 
walking the streets a mile off.] 

Whatever, therefore, is established as true, by the uni- 
form experience and testimony of every sensible man 
every where, and in all time past and present, may rea- 
sonably be considered as unrefutable by any testimony to 
the contrary of a comparatively few persons, who are far 
more likely to be mistaken, or prejudiced, or to have some 
motive for deception ; than the uniform and unprejudiced 
experience of mankind should prove to be fallacious and 



64 LECTURE II. 

untrue. For such a supposition as this last destroys all 
reasonable ground of certainty in any case. 

In fact, the history of the Christian church, from the 
beginning to the present day, presents little else than a 
history of disgraceful quarrels of the most rancorous de- 
scription, and a series of falsehoods unexampled in all the 
other pages of history. Pious frauds consecrated by the 
highest authority ; false gospels, false documents, inter- 
polations of ancient authors for the purpose of deception, 
false saints, false relics, false miracles, forged acts of coun- 
cils, forged decretals, false donations, false revelations, 
spectres and apparitions, preternatural communications, 
miraculous cures, and supernatural revivals and outpour- 
ings of the spirit upon ignorant men and hysterical women, 
supported by the testimony of ancient fathers of the church, 
pontiffs, bishops, doctors, and holy men of the most popu- 
lar sanctity, belonging to all manner of conflicting sects, 
and agreeing in nothing but the common duty of religious 
lying, forging, and inventing, to serve the interest of the 
priesthood, and promote the common cause of public de- 
ception. 

As knowledge and information increase, all these theo- 
logical contrivances lose their credit and efficacy. What 
miracle is performed or pretended ; what appears ; who is 
bewitched at this day in London or Paris, or even in [Sa- 
lem, Boston,] New- York, or Philadelphia ? Priests, and 
the priesthood, and pious frauds, are now confined in their 
operations and effect nearly to women and children ; [I ask 
pardon, ladies, but the truth must be told ; I say, then, 
nearly to women and children ;] and the base wretches 
who enter our families, who work upon the irritable feel- 
ings of women and sick persons, who rob them of their 
property by false hopes, false promises, and false fears, 
and who govern the men by means of the women and 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE. 65 

children, who always hold the ignorant in their power to 
stir them up in hatred against the wise, and who are ac- 
cumulating funds and wealth for their unholy purposes 
far beyond the suspicion of those who do not examine 
modern facts — these avaricious and unprincipled deceivers 
will, according to present appearances, ultimately bring on 
the darkness and superstition of the middle ages. [The 
same means which is so powerful to enlighten, while the 
mind is left free to act, the means of the press, will be 
equally powerful to darken, if monopolized by the hands 
of the wicked, and the mind is thereby enslaved.] Why 
does not the legislature of New- York, and of every other 
state, pass a mortmain act? — [an act to prevent pro- 
perty from going into dead hands, where it is entirely 
useless to the state, and such are all religious institutions 
— an act to take possession of all such property, and either 
render it taxable, or else convert it to a national education, 
free from superstition ; that is, free from religion ; for all 
the religions of the present day are built on superstition. 
The people are ignorant of their rights. The answer, 
therefore, to the above question is plain and easy.] Be- 
cause it is not easy to find a more deplorably ignorant and 
bigoted assembly — a more priest-ridden set of legislators 
than the legislators of New- York. 

Primus in orbe deos facit Timor. Ignorance of na- 
tural causes begat terror : terror, superstition : superstition, 
priests and the priesthood : whose interests and unbending 
efforts are exerted to perpetuate the fear, the ignorance, 
and the superstition that gave them birth. The experi- 
ence of past times, and the unhesitating conviction of well 
informed men at the present day, render every pretended 
miracle, Christian, Mahomedan, and Pagan, utterly in- 
credible ; and imperiously demand, not only strong testi- 
mony, but every precaution to be taken to prevent mistake, 



66 LECTURE II. 

in proportion as any asserted fact is of an extraordinary 
character. All the modes of judicial investigation and 
precaution that can be applied, ought rigidly to be required 
in such a case. 

19. Hence, no historian is worthy of credit, unless, in 
proportion as we can ascertain his opportunities of per- 
sonal information as to the facts he relates, his character 
and standing in society, his freedom from bias, and all 
the usual sources of mistake, inaccuracy, and deception. 
Where he relies on the testimony of others, in all cases 
of fact not intrinsically and antecedently credible, he ought 
faithfully to cite his authority, that we may judge of that 
authority by the same rules we judge of himself. An 
author who does not accurately refer to his authorities, is 
evidence for no fact whatever ; and ought to be banished 
from our libraries. [On this rule, the Bible should be 
thus banished; and if men had followed this rule, it 
would have been banished long ago, as being totally un- 
worthy of credit for any historical fact whatever.] 

20. All historic authority is destroyed by manifest ana- 
chronisms as to dates, persons, and places, words and 
phrases. When Moses, the reputed author of the Penta- 
teuch, which he had no ipeans of writing, (Deut. xxvii. 1 
et seq.) among fifty instances of this kind, alludes to the 
times of the kings of Israel and Judah — when Ezekiel, 
in his supposed prophecy, anterior to the captivity, alludes 
twice to that great man, the prophet Daniel, who was 
but about twelve years of age when the captivity hap- 
pened — who can put faith in such authors, or give a mo- 
ment's credit to their authenticity ? 

21. Let A be a narrator of a fact ; he tells it to B, who 
tells it to C, who tells it to D. All these amount to but 
one witness, viz. A. No evidence of a fact is strengthen- 
ed by such a series and succession of derivative testimony. 



HISTORICAL EVIDENCE- 67 

But if A, B, C, and D, each of them testify to the same 
fact from their own separate observation, without commu- 
nication with each other, the testimony is strong in pro- 
portion to the number of such separate witnesses testifying 
independent of each other. If they agree in all the gene- 
ral, leading, and important features of the transaction, 
their testimony is not much vitiated by their disagreement 
as to minute particulars which will admit of being obser- 
ved differently. But, all the sources of false information 
apply to each of them, and are to be so applied. 

22. In transmitted and hearsay evidence, every fresh 
hand through which the narration passes, increases the 
chances of mistake, and deprives us of weighing the testi- 
mony to such a degree, that veracity and accuracy are 
annihilated altogether after half a dozen transmissions. 

Such are the principal canons that bear upon historical 
evidence generally. They constitute a set of rules for 
judging of the value of historical evidence, that are found- 
ed on common sense, and every day's practice and expe- 
rience in judicial proceedings. These are strictly applicable 
to the subject ; for whether a man professes to tell truth by 
word of mouth, or to write it down for our information, 
the means of deciding whether it be truth or falsehood 
that he tells us, are the same. It may be said, that if such 
strictness be applied to past history, the value of it will be 
nearly annihilated, and so it ought to be. I have no 
belief in any historical fact [of the least importance, or 
which at all borders on the marvellous] beyond 500 years 
anterior to our christian era, for reasons already assigned. 
And of all subsequent history, from Herodotus to the last 
historian, I believe three fourths [of all that was written 
prior to the art of printing, perfectly] worthless.* History 

♦ " I would ask the reader to peruse Mr. Richardson's preface to his Per- 



68 LECTURE II. 

is only of use for the conclusious we can draw from it, 
applicable to passing and future events. But from dubious 
facts, w T hat useful conclusions can be drawn ? The Augus- 
tan age of history has not yet arrived ; and will not ar- 
rive, till readers are taught how to judge and discriminate, 
as well as read. 

[In my next I shall enter into an examination of the 
evidence itself on which the authenticity of the gospels 
themselves, as well as the facts narrated therein, are sup- 
posed to rest.]* 

sian Dictionary, as to the histories of Alexander the Great, and the expedi- 
tion of Xerxes, or the discrepancies in French and English accounts of the 
same historical transactions. 

* [The whole of the foregoing lecture is borrowed from Philo Veritas, as 
published in the Correspondent, except what is inclosed in brackets.] 



LECTURE III. 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 

" Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thes. v. 21. 

All the canons of evidence laid down in the preceding 
lecture, may be brought to bear more 01 less directly on 
the evidences of Christianity. The great difficulty which 
lies in the way of people generally, in arriving at any 
thing like truth, is, but few people, comparatively, have 
sufficient time and leisure to read, investigate, and exa- 
mine for themselves ; of course, they have to depend on 
the statements of others, in whom they place confidence. 
But these statements are often so contradictory, that they 
are at a loss what to believe ; perhaps it is the safest to hold 
the mind in suspense, and not to place too great confidence 
in any, until long experience and repeated trials will war- 
rant us in so doing. 

My learned friend has added an extract from the North 
American Review, for April, 1829, as a sequel to his prece- 
ding essays ; most of which essays I have embodied in the 
two foregoing lectures. He says, " this extract is manifestly 
the production of an able, but very disingenuous christian. 
I say," says he, " disingenuous, because he commenced by 
calling Gibbon, the historian, a disingenuous writer. I chal- 
lenge the author of that Review, to show me an instance 
of disingenuous reasoning in Gibbon's sixteenth chapter : 
or of disingenuous quotation. I am satisfied the writer in 



70 



LECTURE III. 



question is competent to the discussion, and he has no 
doubt the advantage of the library at Harvard College : 
let him use it. I tell him he cannot prove his assertion. 
Gibbon was not a hired and paid advocate of one side of 
a public question : the author of that Review probably is. 
Gibbon did not shape his course according to the road 
pointed out by popular prejudice ; he dared to run counter 
to it. The reviewer in the North American, has the ad- 
vantage of popular prejudice, and popular bigotry, and all 
fashionable opinion in his favor. He swims with the 
stream. Let him show Gibbon's disingenuity if he can. 
I know he cannot. No honest man, who is not bribed to 
defend imposture, can be otherwise actuated, than by a 
spirit of hostility to the christian religion. I am so for no 
other reason but because I believe its proper appellation to 
be the christian imposture."* If our author means what 

* The following is the extract from the North American Review, alluded 
to above. 

" If the reader has followed us in the somewhat desultory course of 
our observations, he will be disposed to accord with us in the conclusion of 
the superior eloquence of the ancients ; their superiority, that is, not in the 
natural power itself, but in the more advantageous use of that power. This 
general inference will include the particular one, that in the mere beauties 
of composition, the rhetoric of history, the ancient historians, as a body, 
surpassed the moderns. It is no derogation from the exalted desert of so 
many admirable writers in all the living languages of Europe to confess 
this ; for, as we shall presently see, if to the venerable names of Greek and 
Roman story be awarded the palm of excellence in style, their successors 
may assert the better and wiser merit, of superiority in the inductive ele- 
ments of history, of being more exact, more finished, more useful. The 
taste so prevalent among the ancient historians, of placing fictitious speeches 
in the mouths of prominent persons in their history, speeches conceived 
and composed by the historian himself — a practice judiciously relinquished 
by nearly all modern historians of eminence — illustrates the difference in 
spirit between the respective writers. Botta has greatly erred, we conceive, 
in attempting to revive this obsolete usage, founded altogether upon the 
rhetorical aim and taste of antiquity in the composition of history, in con- 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 71 

the Christian religion has been, and still is, with a few 
laudable exceptions, in practice, I perfectly agree with 

trast with the devotion to truth and simplicity, which is demanded by a 
more enlightened judgment. 

" For nothing is plainer than the principle, that the value of history depends 
upon its certainty, that is, not only its conformity to truth in the narration 
of individual facts, but its general accuracy, fidelity, and fulness. It is this 
which should essentially characterize history ; since the charms of eloquence 
are equally fascinating when embodied in mere works of fiction. Absolute 
certainty, to be sure, is incompatible with human affairs. ■ Dubitare cogor,' 
says Tacitus, * fato et sorte nascendi.' History, therefore, although its end 
should be faithfully to mark the frailties, and celebrate the virtues of hu- 
manity, yet, like its object, is necessarily subject to imperfections. Too 
often has it betrayed the confidence of the great and good, who had leaned 
upon it, as the advocate of their worth and the pledge of their glory ; as the 
means of securing to their names, when dead, that justice from posterity, 
which the petty passions of their contemporaries had denied to their cha- 
racter when living. For it has obscured their worth and intercepted their 
glory, by the extravagance or faintness of its eulogium ; by total silence or 
the faultiness of its details ; and by the undue elevation of the merit of 
their competitors and opponents. But few, of the multitudes wh© assume 
the name of histories, resemble the abstract idea of historical perfection. 
The attainment of this lofty distinction, like the acquisition of the " spolia 
opima" at Rome, is the rare event in a long series of anxious efforts* But 
none, we think, can deny, that the standard of excellence, in this depart- 
ment of writing, has been considerably raised in modern times, without any 
diminution of the proportion of those who have reached it. This we shall 
perceive by considering those attributes of history, which the moderns 
have either improved or newly created ; to understand which, let us briefly 
premise a summary of the critical principles which apply to the subject. 

" The principal fountains of history are tradition and contemporary rela- 
tions. Tradition relates to accounts handed down orally from generation 
to generation, their origin being generally clouded in the remoteness of 
time, and their credibility established by no contemporary writings. It is 
essential to the plausibility of traditions that they contradict no other tradi- 
tion which is equally plausible ; that they appear to be as old as the events 
which they commemorate ; that they appear to have been believed, as long 
as known ; that they be inconsistent with no existing public institution ; and 
that they coincide with all the better authenticated kinds of historical evi- 
dence. Traditions should not only be strengthened by these favorable pre- 
sumptions, but they should be refined from every imputation of prejudice, 
interest, and misrepresentation. It is essential to the general credibility of 



72 



LECTURE II. 



him; but, if by christian religion, he means such as we 
have reason to believe it was taught by Jesus and his 

contemporary memoirs, that an unbroken series of proofs be adducible to 
show that they are genuine and free from adulteration ; that the facts there- 
in related agree with all other equally credible histories ; and that the opinion 
of contemporary and subsequent writers bear witness to the fidelity, accuracy, 
and means of information of the author of the documents. These are the 
canons, by which to judge of the credibility of history, properly so called. 
But the express relation of an event may be corroborated by constructive 
and subsidiary evidence. Such are monuments, medals, and inscriptions, 
which are so frequently made use of to illustrate obscure points in Roman 
history ; such are the " quipos" or knotted cords of the Peruvians, and the 
pictorial records of the Mexicans ; such are the ruins, or any other equally 
certain traces of an ancient city ; and such is any public institution, whose 
origin can be explained only by the particular tradition or writing undei 
consideration. Examples of all these things, and of their utility in sup- 
porting or disproving accounts, which rest more immediately in human 
testimony, will readily occur to the learned reader. 

In short, the whole matter is a question of evidence, to be tried by the 
same rules, which are of every day's application in courts of justice, and 
which, more than any other portion of jurisprudence, are remarkable for 
being founded upon plain common sense, and fortified by the inductions of 
the soundest practical philosophy. Is the evidence adduced of the highest 
kind, or is it of an inferior class 7 Is the witness of such standing and cha- 
racter that his veracity cannot be suspected, nor his intelligence impeached 1 
Had he sufficient means of ascertaining the facts, which he undertakes to 
relate 1 Does he stand contradicted by any other witness ; and if so, which 
of the two is the more credible, and gives the more plausible account of the 
affair ? Is the fact related likely in itself, or is it intrinsically impossible, in- 
credible, or improbable 7 Is the testimony of the witness corroborated by 
any circumstantial evidence, which, to borrow the language of the bar, 
cannot, like man, forget, misrecollect, or wilfully falsify 7 All these are per- 
tinent enquiries, and according as a history sustains the application of such 
tests, are we to judge of its certainty and real value. 

Much of our historical knowledge, it must be confessed, depends upon 
evidence which is of a secondary kind, and, therefore, of necessity, less 
sure. This uncertainty is wrought into the very texture and fabric of all 
our knowledge of complicated facts ; because it does not always happen that 
we have the best evidence of them ; and even the most positively attested 
relations must be imperfect without the comparison of different statements, 
some of which must result in hearsay, and therefore partake of the defec- 
tive nature of mere traditionary information. Very few events have been 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 7o 

disciples, and lastly by Paul, making due allowance for 
the times in which they lived, I do not agree with him. 

recorded, in. all their causes, progress, bearings, and effects, by one who 
was himself the eye-witness of them, through each of these predicaments. 
Suppose him to be the most credible and intelligent witness that ever tes- 
tified on earth, yet his narrative must depart more or less from certainty, 
either by omitting material particulars of which he was ignorant, or by 
trusting to the information of others, of whose credibility we may be less 
fully assured A history, then, will be more or less valuable, in proportion 
as its proofs consist more or less of that evidence, which is of the highest 
and best character. Now, these considerations being premised, we say, 
that modern history resting upon evidence incomparably better than an- 
cient, it therefore deserves the praise of superior certainty and utility. In 
entering into the details of this proposition, we shall first examine the rela- 
tive purity of the sources of ancient and modern history ; and next inquire 
if modern historians have not more judiciously employed their advantages. 
In all ancient histories, a very striking circumstance is the frequent re- 
liance upon traditions, which relate to events that happened long before 
the traditions were committed to any authentic record for preservation. 
Tradition, after all, is little better than common rumor — fame — 

' Tarn ficti pravique tenex, quam nuntia veri ;' 
and is never admissible but in the absence of less authentic evidence. Even 
the most credible traditions, those which are connected with a particular 
monument, and which do not contradict any written document, frequently 
have an equivocal authority. From the multitude of such cases, a few in- 
structive examples" may be selected. Thus the fable of Attius Navius, 
who is said to have performed a miraculous feat by cutting a whetstone 
through with a razor in the reign of Tarquinius Priscus, is attested by 
the existence of the identical razor and whetstone in the latter days of the 
republic. In a battle fought by the dictator A. Postumius against the 
Latins, the twin gods Castor and Pollux were believed to have fought on 
the side of the Romans ; in evidence of which a temple was erected to com- 
memorate the legend, and the horse of Castor left the track of his hoof 
imprinted upon the surface of a siliceous rock near lake Regillus. An 
alter was erected to A jus Loquens, a god made for the occasion, being a mys- 
terious voice which warned the Romans against the approaching capture 
of the city by the Gauls. Tacitus relates that a " Ficus Ruminalis," reputed 
to be the very tree under which Romulus and Remus were suckled, existed 
in the Comitium more than eight hundred and forty years afterwards, to 
attest the fact to those who were credulous enough to believe it. Greek ex- 
amples without number to the same effect might be cited; but we content 
ourselves with Roman ones, because the books in which they are found are 

7 



74 LECTURE III. 

I do not admit that I am dishonest, much less that I am 
bribed to defend an imposture ; and yet I feel no " hostili- 

more familiar to readers in general, and to ourselves in particular. The 
curious student may see a specimen of them in the u Memoirs de l'Acade- 
mie des inscriptions," (torn. vi.) a collection of pieces, which, out of France, 
is not prized so highly as it deserves to be. 

" These traditions do sometimes, it is true, corroborate some credible 
fact, as the battle and the invasion in the second and third of the above 
instances ; but, as in the first and fourth, they are as often attached to fables ; 
and of the whole, we may say with Tully, ■ Nihil debet esse in philosophia 
commentitiis fabeliis loci.' And we learn from them how easy it is for 
numerous interests, such as the purposes of superstition, national vanity, 
and even the trifling passions of individuals, to give rise to traditions which 
only serve to perpetuate falsehood. This it is, which has conferred dignity, 
and even divinity, upon the origin of empires. * Datur haec venia antiqui- 
tati, ut, miscendo humana divinis, primordia urbium augustiora faciat.' 
This it is, which has poured such a blaze of holiness around all that is 
obscure, all that is suspicious, in the remoteness of antiquity. Scarce was 
there a single ancient nation, but could point you to a deity for its founder. 
Nay, lying tradition traces the origin of Romans, English, French, Turks, 
and Germans, each by separate derivations, down from the all-prolific 
Trojans. 

" Reliance upon tradition, secondary evidence, and other imperfect proofs, 
is too common throughout all ancient history. But the fault assumes its 
most obnoxious form in the early Greek accounts of foreign nations. They 
seem to be a sort of triumph to fraud and credulity. At that day, Jhe ex- 
amination of a foreign land was no inconsiderable enterprise ; and imme- 
diate reputation was the consequence to the intelligent traveller, who safely 
returned from his wanderings. It was thus that the fairest flowers were 
gathered by Herodotus and Xenophon, by Pythagoras, Democritus, and 
Plato, to adorn the works they severally published. Sometimes the inspec- 
tion of original annals, but more frequently the conversation of Egyptian 
priests, or Persian magi, or some other equally unsafe authority, was the 
only source of the stranger's historical information. c The Greeks,' said 
the most perfect of ancient historians, { admire only their own perfections ;' 
" sua tantum mirantur." Still they had an ardent, an enterprising curio- 
sity ; but it was too often a morbid appetite for novelties, indulged without 
sufficient discrimination as to the objects of pursuit, or the means of grati- 
fication. Oftentimes they seemed to enquire, not to judge, but to believe. 
At any rate, their foreign histories abound with errors and legendary false- 
hoods. Hence arise the mistakes contained in the classical accounts of the 
Jews in Tacitus and Justin, who doubtless copied the Greek historians. 



EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 75 

ty to the Christian religion," as I understand it. But, at 
the same time, I must confess, I am unable to distinguish 

Hence the clashing and confusion of the traditions with regard to the Per- 
sians in the * PersaV of „l£schylus, in Herodotus, Ctesias, and Xenophon. 
And if we may credit so competent a judge as Strabo, the loquacious 
Greeks were not to be trusted in their accounts of other foreign countries, 
which Lucian has so keenly satiri?^d in his ' True History.' Indeed, their 
uncertainty is very generally admitted by the critics ; and the attempt to 
reconcile them has engaged and baffled the most persevering industry, and 
the most enlightened genius. So imperfect and erroneous was the know- 
ledge of the Greeks concerning the Barbarians, that is, every people but 
themselves, during the golden age of their literature, and until after the 
conquests of Alexander. 

" The same fault, of neglecting to pay proper attention to the evidence of 
alleged facts, vitiates the domestic history of Greece. Without going into 
a minute analysis of this proposition, which would occupy too much space 
and time, let us believe some of the most learned and irreproachable among 
the ancients themselves. Strabo, in the place already cited, testifies to the 
fact ; and Thucydides, who set the example of a better proceeding, even 
apologizes for not being a fabulist. The history, as well as the philosophy, 
of Greece, previous to the reign of Cyrus, was identified with works of 
imagination. The historians who succeeded, from Cadmus, the Milesian, to 
Herodotus, if we may rely on the universal belief of the ancients, with the 
blood of the poets of the age before them, inherited also the license of 
poetic fancy. The historical memoirs of that period were perplexed, inter- 
rupted, and often equivocal ; and writers supplied by fables or conjecture, 
the numerous deficiencies, which essentially belong to all traditional rela- 
tions. Partly from this suspicious character of preceding historians, though 
more, indeed, from his own admirable eloquence, Herodotus was esteemed 
the father of history. His work we may therefore consider a favorable 
specimen of what the Greeks effected in history, previous to the publica- 
tion of Thucydides. In all facts, which came under personal observation, 
his veracity is unquestioned ; but elsewhere, the absence of original docu- 
ments, in depriving him of the only proper source of history, has exposed 
him to the reproach of succeeding writers. But for this, Cicero would not 
have hazarded the expression, that the works of Herodotus and Theopom- 
pus contain innumerable fables ; 'innumerabiles iabulae ;' nor would Juve- 
nel have made the remark so often quoted, 

1 Creditur olim 

Velificatus Athos, et quicquid Graecia mendax 

Audet in historian 
"It was not until the most vigorous age of Grecian genius, that, in the 



76 LECTURE III. 

this religion from pure morality, or at least all of it that 
1 would undertake to defend, or think it of any conse- 

hands of Thucydidcs and Xenophon, the contemporary domestic history 
exhibited any pretensions to judgment, research, and, by consequence, 
certainty. 

" As to the Romans, most of their knowledge of foreign nations, previous 
to the last days of the republic, was derived from the Greeks. 'Abest 
enim historia litteris nostris, 5 says Tully. Their firtt domestic historian, 
Fabius Pictor, flourished more than five hundred years after the supposed 
era of the building of Rome, and much of the earlier history of the city is 
involved in doubt and obscurity. Even if this were not the express admis- 
sion of Livy and other equally competent critics, yet the contradictory 
statements of the most important events, the perplexed and broken series 
of their chronology, and the many relations in their histories, which are 
confessedly fabulous and legendary, would remove all hope of certainty in 
the early Roman historians. The attention of scholars has been recently 
drawn to this point by the writings of Niebuhr and Wachsmuth ; but the 
same things were discussed many years ago, in some valuable dissertations, 
by MM. Sallier and Pouilly, in the French " Memoires" (torn, vi.) The 
essays of the latter, especially, are sensible, clear, and direct ; his argu- 
ments are convincing, and his illustrations numerous, and pregnant with 
conclusions. It is not our purpose to consider the subject at length ; but a 
cursory view of it is too pertinent to be passed over entirely. 

" It is admitted that, except treaties and laws, resolutions of the senate or 
votes of the people, and insulated inscriptions, all engraved upon public 
monuments or tables of brass or stone, the early Roman history, if preserved 
at all, must have been preserved in the records called u annales maximi" or 
k( commentary, pontificum." These consisted, according to Cicero, of pub- 
lic annals, composed yearly by the " pontifex maximus," from the founda- 
tion of the city ("ab initio rerum Romanarum") down to the time of P. 
Mucius, in which the memory of important events was preserved for the 
information of posterity. Now there is no doubt that such a record was, 
for a certain period, carefully compiled in Rome .; but was it commenced at 
so early a period, and if so, how long did the genuine record exist? We 
reply, first, it is wholly incredible that it went back so far, because in those 
ancient times, when laws and treaties were preserv ed only upon tables of 
brass and stone, there could not. be either the disposition or the means to 
write such a circumstantial account of events as Livy, Plutarch, and Diony- 
sius of Halicarnassus, give us ; and secondly, if there was such a record, it 
perished long before any history was composed from the materials it fur- 
nished. Cicero, twice in his works, refers to the ancient "annales maximi" 
as existing in his time. In one of these passages he says, nothing can be 



EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 77 

tjuence for mankind to believe ; hence I suppose the diffe- 
rence between me and Philo Veritas is merely verbal, 

more delightful to peruse ; a text which has greatly puzzled the commenta- 
tors ; for the words, { Nihil, potest esse jucundius,' are plainly written in all 
the manuscnpts ; and the critics appear to be agreed that Tully could not 
mean what he said; and therefore, some are for substituting the word 
f jejunius;' and others for slyly inserting a negative particle, so as to read 
: injucundius. 5 Their industry, we think, could well have been spared on 
this occasion. They forgot the taste of Cicero for antiquities, and his pride 
in the historical greatness of his country. For if the books of which he 
spoke contained a pretended record of the early history of Rome, as we 
find it in Livy, we can readily conceive that he took pleasure in reading it ; 
for it is throughout, every body must admit, as entertaining as a romance, 
and probably as veracious too. 

" The truth is, Plutarch expressly says, that awork of that name existed, 
but pronounces it to be a forgery. And how could it be otherwise ? Clodius 
Albinus, as cited by Plutarch, Livy, and Plutarch himself, all declare that 
the genuine old " annales maximi" were burnt by the Gauls when they 
sacked the city. And various circumstances confirm this account. For in- 
stance, the " annales maximi" contained, as we learn from Dionysius, what 
no Roman ever believed ; as that Romulus was the son of JEneas ; that Re- 
mus built four cities, Rome, Anchisa, Capua, and iEnea ; and the exploded 
fables of Hercules, and the kings of Alba, which Livy also declares to be 
false. Again, neither the chronology of Rome, nor the consula "fasti" are 
settled, even to a probability ; as Livy and Cicero both state in express terms ; 
which could not be, if the "annales maximi" existed. The most im- 
portant events in ancient Roman history are uncertain, and many of them 
are what Taylor calls c ambulatory stories,' that is, facts told cf several 
cities, and in the present case evidently copied from Greek histories. 
Finally, the first native historian of Rome, Fabius Pictor, instead of re- 
curring to the " annales maximi," which he undoubtedly would have done 
if the book existed, professedly copied Biocles Peparethius, a foreigner 
and a Greek. These proofs, which might easily be extended, corrobo- 
rate the statement of Clodius Albinus, if it stood in need of any other 
support than the opinions of Plutarch and Livy. 

" Such is the state of the case, with respect to the early history of Rome. 
And the sources of information of many subsequent historians were falla- 
cious and insufficient. Prominent among them were the " libri linteri," 
and the " laudationes mortuorum." But the imperfection of his materials 
extorts frequent complaints from Livy. And Cicero says, the " laudationes" 
introduced much falsity into the Roman history ; because they described 
false triumphs, fictitious consulates, and genealogies fabricated to gratify 

7* 



78 LECTURE III. 

after all ; for he would say that I have discarded every- 
thing essential to Christianity but its name, and what I 

family pride. But the leisure consequent on the third Punic war, together 
with the cultivation of Grecian arts and letters, increased the number and 
added to the value of Roman historians. From this period, the annals of 
the republic are probable and coherent ; but it was not until long after- 
wards, that history was successfully cultivated by the citizens of Rome. 
For the sources of history, the writer then had, in addition to private me- 
moirs and the materials before mentioned, the acts and public despatches 
of generals and magistrates, and the records of the senate. 

" It thus appears how slowly, both in Greece and Rome, but especially in 
the latter, history assumed even the semblance of veracity. But the sour- 
ces of knowledge increase, both in extent and purity, as literature ap- 
proaches to perfection; and perhaps, therefore, the materials of ancient 
history, in the most experienced ages of modern learning, were capable of 
producing the highest degree or moral certainty. That this is not the fact ; 
that the utmost perfection to which ancient history could possibly attain, is 
far short of modern accuracy, will best appear by reference to some of those 
positive advantages, which are peculiar to modern times. 

" Foremost in the list, stands the art of printing, that wonderful inven- 
tion, whose influence over the whole range of human affairs almost defies 
measurement or estimation. By means of this, the indigence of the an- 
cients in materials is converted into the most exuberant plenteousness. By 
multiplying and diffusing the evidence of events, it has removed the most 
penetrating defect of ancient history. The knowledge of what is passing 
around us, or of what has taken place, is not confined to the erucjjtion of 
the few ; nor does it live only in the broken, impure, and perplexed rumours 
of the multitude. Histories and original memoirs of every degree of merit 
and pretension, from the splendid quarto to the modest duodecimo ; public 
records, in such voluminous abundance in every country, that the industry 
of a life would not exhaust their contents; parliamentary debates and 
executive documents, printed in such profusion that we are more likely 
to sink under the weight of our riches, than suffer from their deficiency ; 
periodical works, annual, quarterly, monthly, weekly, and daily, whose end 
is * to show virtue her own feature, scorn her own image, and the very age 
and body of the time its form and pressure,' — such are the sources of histo- 
rical knowledge, which exist in modern times, and which, by means of the 
press, are multiplied to an indefinite extent, and beyond the possibility of 
destruction. How striking is the contrast in ancient times, as to which, no 
small portion of the most important facts are necessarily believed on the 
personal credit of a single historian, unsupported by monuments, unaided 
by any subsidiary evidence. It needs no labored discussion to show that 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 79 

call Christianity would be better expressed, and more likely 
to be understood, to be called morality. Be it so. If we 

this single advantage, the possession of the press, settles at once the ques- 
tion of the relative certainty of ancient and modern historians, so far as re- 
gards the materials and sources of histoiy. 

" Nor is there any more doubt concerning the second branch of our en- 
quiry, namely, whether we have not employed our advantages to greater 
profit than the ancients did theirs. Indeed, superior critical skill would be 
the necessary consequence of the general diffusion of knowledge, which 
the invention of printing has produced. It has infused life, health, and 
vigor, into the whole system of literature and science. Not only, therefore, 
are more original memoirs preserved from dispersion and loss in the libra- 
ries of the rich and of public bodies, but the literary ambition of the whole 
world is awakened and sustained by the facility of acquiring knowledge. 
Hence arises the authority, the efficiency, if not the being, of sound public 
opinion, that sublime power, which corrects error, subdues presumption, 
cherishes genius, and consecrates truth, marking for infamy or glory every 
thought and action of life, which comes within the sphere of its operation. 
The utility of this power being measured by the diffusion of learning, its 
beneficial influence must evidently be greater upon modern, than it could 
ever have been upon ancient history. 

" Besides, in our day, the influence of public opinion is not only apparent 
in the bosom of a single nation, but the false judgments of any one people 
are modified and corrected by the criticisms of other nations. It is obvious 
that this circumstance is peculiarly conducive to the certainty of history, by 
making the partialities of each community the corrective of those around 
it. The public sentiment of a single people may easily be vitiated ; but 
the prejudices will not be likely to extend through other states* whose in- 
terests are distinct, whose taste is peculiar, and whose national partialities 
fire watchful and alert. Truth alone can endure the keen scrutiny, to 
which all historical writings are now subjected. The separate states of 
modem Europe and America constitute a vast community of nations, 
whose peculiarities act and react upon them as nations, precisely in the 
same way, followed by similar beneficial results, as single individuals im- 
prove each other, by contact and intercourse in society. 

" Something analogous to this, it is true, might be imagined to exist in the 
Greek republics ; and in the Roman empire, after it had come to embrace 
so many distinct nations. But the case was widely different from what it is 
now. Lacedaemon was jealous of Athens ; and Thebes of both ; and Asia 
Minor and the Islands had interests apart from each of them ; but still the 
feeling and character of the inhabitants of all these various regions were 
Greek, their taste was Greek, their spirit and philosophy were Greek. The 



80 LECTURE III. 

can only understand each other in regard to the thing, we 
shall not contend about the name. I mean, I am not 

influence which one city exerted over the peculiarities of another was 
greatly circumscribed and limited by this consideration, of theiT community 
of language and general national character. Their case more nearly re- 
sembles that of the Italian republics of the middle age, or of the several 
states in our confederacy, or of the Spanish American republics of the 
south, than it does that of the great family of nations of the European 
race. And the overwhelming influence of the city of Rome, towards 
which, all the ambition of the various nations that composed the empire 
centred and converged, and by which all their tastes were controlled, modi- 
fied the operation of the power of which we are speaking, upon the litera- 
ture of the later Romans. Every thing is now radically changed. We 
have ceased to think that there is but one blessed region wherein genius is 
vernacular and patrimonial, and in whose embellishment nature exhausted 
all the might and fertility of her invention. There is no longer a people, 
who can claim, with Rome, the insolent prerogative of universal empire ; 
or with Athens, the exclusive heritage of taste, of genius, or of elegance. 
The division of the literary world into distinct languages and communities 
is attended with this useful effect ; and each nation has learned to prize its 
own excellence, without despising or neglecting whatever is learned or in- 
genious elsewhere. History derives from this comprehensive and enlighten- 
ed curiosity, this enlarged literary tolerance, a certainty, variety, and copi- 
ousness, which were hardly known to the ancients even in speculation. ' 

" Apprehensive lest we may prove tedious, we shall confine ourselves to 
remarking upon but one topic more, under this head. The value of*modern 
history is enhanced, we conceive, by the greater research, which is the con- 
sequence of greater scientific attainments. Science may repress the spirit 
and exuberance of fancy ; but it will, at the same time, compensate for 
this inconvenience by the bestowment of still greater benefits, having 
peculiar influence upon the certainty of history. By means of experience, 
we are disciplined to habits of circumspection, of hesitancy, shall we say of 
distrust ? Every day which adds to our knowledge and judgment, diminishes 
our credulity, and our tendency to rely upon imperfect proofs ; since it 
teaches us a delicate, timorous, and laborious estimate of the grounds of 
moral evidence. It is an advantage, which the mere lapse of time, the 
simple circumstance of living at a particular age of the world, confers upon 
us. Experience instructs us in the errors of our fathers ; it discloses the 
various passions, interests, and caprices, which may delude us into false 
judgments ; and it also reveals the means of guarding the candor and sim- 
plicity of the understanding. Here we obviously excel the ancient histo- 
rians. Not only do we examine facts with more penetrating discernment. 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 81 

hostile to the principle, " to do as I would be done by f 
and this is what I mean by Christianity, when I say I am 
not hostile to-it* 

I now proceed to examine the testimonies, as was pro- 
posed. 

After referring to his authorities, (which I here pass 
over,) our learned author says, "These authorities, though 
I have most of them separately, are best found in the 
collections of Cotelerius, and in the many volumed folio, 
entitled Bibliotheca veterum patrum ut et Hereticorum, of 
which there are two or three editions, the maxima the best. 
I do not 7ioio possess that work, but I pledge myself to any 
adversary, to produce the original of any reference I rely 

but we also purify our opinions and conclusions from those numerous errors, 
the sole support of which is prejudice, and their origin credulity ; there is 
no longer overpowering authority in names ; for we learn to see error as it 
is, cleared from the lustre of false beauty, the factitious good thrown around 
it by party, by fashion, and by prescription. Whenever a work of high 
pretension is now published, how strict is the scrutiny to which it is sub- 
jected. Witness the universal alertness of criticism excited by the ap- 
pearance of Sir Walter Scott's * Napoleon,' which is read, studied, exa- 
mined, all over Europe and America ; and, since Asia, Africa, and the Pacific 
Islands, are no longer exempt from the illumination of English literature, 
we may add, all over the civilized world. The spirit of unsparing investi- 
gation, which characterizes modern history, is the pledge and guarantee of 
its greater certainty ; for it exposes the interested praises or censure of tho 
contemporary chronicler, discloses his prejudices in their naked deformity, 
and reveals to the world those monuments of truth, which time had over- 
turned in his flight, and left to he concealed under the obscure and dusty 
ruins of the past." 

* It is evident, however, that all religionists do mean something more by 
religion, and especially by Christianity, than simple morality. Hence, al- 
though I publish the above as delivered, being then exactly my views, yet I 
think it best to call things by their proper names. And, as I can no longer 
see any thing true in Christianity, aside from morality, I have no longer any 
use for the christian name. I am perfectly satisfied that all mankind are 
just as well off without that name as with it. Jesus of Nazareth, if such 
a man ever lived, (which is doubtful,) is the same to me as any other man, 
and nothing more. 



82 LECTURE III. 

on, with a specification of the edition which I actually use 
for the purpose, and the page where it is to be found. 

The history of the Jewish transactions, aM the state of 
the Jews from Augustus to Tiberius, are treated of by 
their agent and ambassador Philo Judeeus : generally, 
from the earliest times to the time of Trajan, by Jose- 
phus : their theological opinions, are to be found in the 
Talmudists, and the Mishna; and in the Jewish history 
of Joseph Ben Gorion, or Josippon. 

Philo Judaeus was cotemporary with the period assign- 
ed to the life of Jesus Christ, and the fair conclusion from 
nis works is, that he was among the Jews at Jerusalem or 
at Rome, at the very period of the crucifixion. 

Josephus was born about two years after the crucifixion. 

The mishna dates about A. D. 180. The Talmud 
A. D. 500. There are two or three very doubtful and ob- 
scure passages that Lardner would press into the service 
if he could. 

Joseph Ben Gorion wrote, according to Lardner, A. D. 
930. So also says Basnage. 

Of Christ arid of the Christians, none of4 these 
Jewish accounts take any notice. Nor of the prodigies, 
or of the public excitation said by the evangelists to 
have accompanied that event. Circumstances so strange, 
as not easily to have been passed over by an historian, 
had they really happened. 

Let us suppose an examination in court.* One witness 

* " Counsel. This is John Nokes, if your honor pleases : we call him 
to prove the presence of Thomas Stiles, in the room, at the time. John 
Nokes, were you at the place in question, at the time stated? 

John Nokes. Yes. 

Counsel. Did you see Thomas Stiles there at that time ? 

John Nokes. Yes, I did. 

Counsel. How do you know it was Thomas Stiles? 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 83 

testifies positively to a fact, the presence of a certain per- 
son, well known, at a certain time and place. Others 
who were present at the same time and place, who could 
not have avoided noticing this person, had he been present, 
unite in saying, that the person in question was not pre- 

John Nokes. Because, he had on a white coat, blue silk jacket, red 
breeches, and green colored stockings, and I could not help remarking him. 

Counsel. Do you know the person of Thomas Stiles? 

John Nokes. Perfectly well. 

Counsel. Who were in the room at the time ? 

John Nokes. Several people were there : Mr. A. B., Mr. C. D., Mr. E. 
P., Mr. G. H. 

Counsel. Call Mr. A. B. : Mr. A. B. were you at the frolic at the time 
and place John Nokes speaks of? 

Mr. A. B. Yes, I was there. 

Counsel. Did you see Thomas Stiles there ? 

Mr. A. B. No, I did not. 

Counsel, You hear his dress described, did you see any body there so 
dressed. 

Mr. A. B. No, there was nobody thei3 dressed in that manner. I 
know Thomas Stiles well ; I am sure if he had been there I should have seen 
him ; especially in such a dress. 

Counsel. How long did you stay in the roora? 

Mr. A. B. I staid there the whole time : I came there before John 
Nokes arrived, who came late ; and I was there when John Nokes went 
away. 

Counsel. Is it possible for Thomas Stiles to hav,3 been there, and you 
not see him ? 

Mr. A. B. No, it is not possible. I know him well : there was no 
person so dressed at any time whatever while he was there. 

Counsel. Call Mr. C. D., and the other witnesses. 

(They all depose to the same purpose as Mr. A. B.) 

Counsel. Here are four witnesses, who swear positively that Thomas 
Stiles wasnot at the place, at the time sworn to by John Nokes. They all 
say that he could not possibly have been there without their knowledge ; that 
there is no room for mistake in this matter. These are men of good cha- 
racter, who have no interest to deceive. Under these circumstances, is it 
]»ssibie to give credit to John Nokes, who has a manifest and strong incli- 
nation to make us believe that Thomas Stiles was there ? Here are four 
evidences unimpeachable, who contradict John Nokes : can you believe 
him? 



84 LECTURE III. 

sent. Such united testimony of several, under such cir- 
cumstances, although negative, must destroy the testimony 
of one individual, though positive. I then ask, in the 
words of my learned author, " Is it possible, respectable 
men of high standing and character in the nation, could 
have given an account, professedly a fair, ample, and true 
one, of the events of the very period in question, and pass 
over the strange events related by these evangelists ? Who 
Philo Judseus, and Josephus were, we know ; and we 
know their standing in society ; who the authors of the 
books ascribed to the evangelists were, we know not. 

" ] am aware, that some very obscure passages in the 
Mishna, and the Talmud, are construed as relating to 
Jesus Christ, but I am satisfied to refer the reader to Lard- 
ner's extracts from Lightfoot. See Lard. Works, vol. 7, 
p. 138, et seq. 

" But is it true that Josephus never mentions Jesus 
Christ? 

" It is true ; I refer to the summary of the argument in 
7 Lard. 120, et seq., which leaves not the slightest room 
for doubt about this passage in Josephus being an jmpu- 
dent and clumsy forgery. I deny that there is a clergy- 
man now in Europe ignorant enough to defend it. Gib- 
bon refers to the conclusive objections of La Fevre in the 
edition of Josephus put forth by Havercamp, and to the 
masterly reply of the Abbe Longerue to Daubuz, in the 
Bibliotheque ancienne et moderne, torn. 7, p. 237 — 288. 
The latter book I do not possess. Havercamp's edition of 
Josephus, in two vols. fol. 1726, is now before me. Pages 
189 to 283 of the second volume, are occupied by the dis- 
quisitions at length, pro and con, of various authors, on the 
authenticity of this passage in Josephus relating to Jesus 
Christ ; (Antiquit. Jud. book 8, ch. 3, sec. 3,) beginning 
with the defence of it, by Ch. Daubuz, prefaced by Crabe. 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 85 

The letter of Tanaquil Faber to John Chabrol, (response 
sans replique,) is found as Gibbon cites it, p. 267 — 273. 
Blondel, Leclerc, and Bp. Warburton, also condemn the 
passage. If any man will give himself the trouble of 
carefully examining this controversy in Havercamp and 
Lardner, as I have done, and can then deliberately assert 
that he thinks the passage genuine, I can only say I should 
entertain strong suspicions of his judgment or veracity. 
The fact is, the passage was first cited by Eusebius, Hist. 
Ecc. lib. 2, ch. 23 ; that notorious and unprincipled falsi- 
fier of all history — that forger on principle, hud by profes- 
sion. The passage was not in the editions of Josephus 
known to Justin Martyr, Clemens Alexandrinus, Tertul- 
lian, or Origen. Eusebius first produced it. The passage 
is his forgery ; in like manner he forged the letter of Ab- 
garus, of Edessa, to Jesus Christ, and the answer, and he 
contributed, by forged additions, and wilful misquotations 
of Tertullian, to give currency to the silly fable about the 
Meletenian legion, whose prayers saved the army of Mar- 
cus Aurelius from dying of thirst. Yet is this Eusebius 
the main source of Christian ecclesiastical history for more 
than three centuries ! Is it possible for any tyro in histo- 
rical criticism to consider such a man as Eusebius. pro- 
fessing and practising these forgeries, authority to be relied 
en for any fact whateTer ? I had almost forgotten the 
forged letter of Pontius Pilate, and the proposal of Tibe- 
rius, which Justin Martyr and Eusebius endeavored to 
palm upon the credulous Christians. As to the passage 
relating to Paul of Tarsus, in Longinus, Dr. Hudson first 
rsceived it from L. A. Zacagni, an Italian, who said he 
copied it from a MS. in the Vatican. Fabricius considered it 
as spurious, and I know of no author who defends it. At 
this period of Christian forgery, the presumption is against 
every Christian assertion, not intrinsically credible. 

8 



86 LECTURE III. 

" Having now cleared the road from Eusebian rubbish, 
I may proceed to other authors." 

One important fact is, to know who the witnesses were, 
and at what time they lived. 

Suetonius. This writer became secretary to the Empe- 
ror Adrian, about A. D. 118. In his life of Claudius, it 
is thought by some that he referred to the christians, 
though this is doubtful ;* but in his life of Nero, chapter 
16, he says, that in this reign, " The christians were pun- 
ished, a class of men professing a new and pernicious su- 
perstition."t 

" Tacitus, who wrote about the same time with Sueto- 
nius and Pliny, says, in the 15 th book of his annals, chapter 
44, that nothing could prevent the suspicion of having 
fired the city, resting on Nero : c To suppress, therefore, 
this common rumor, Nero procured others to be accused, 
and inflicted exquisite punishments on those people, who, 
in abhorrence of their crimes, were commonly' called 
Christians. They were so called from Christ, who was 
publicly executed by the procurator Pontius Pilate, in the 
reign of Tiberius. This pernicious superstition, though 
checked for a while, broke out again and spread not only 
from Judea, the source of this evil, but reached the city 
also ; whither flew from all quarters, all things vile and 
shameful, and where they find shelter and encouragement. 
At first, those only were apprehended who confessed 
themselves of that sect ; afterwards, on their information, 
a great number were apprehended and convicted, not so 
much of having caused the fire, as of hatred to tha ku- 

* See Suetonius, vit. Claud, ch. 25. See also the Correspondent, vol. v. 
p. 315. — But Christian writers have rare digestion. 

t The latin of this and other quotations will be found in the Correspon- 
dent. I thought they would not be useful to the common reader, and they 
;are therefore omitted. 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 87 

He goes on to describe the punishments; c at 
length (says Tacitus) these men, though really criminal, 
and deserving of exemplary punishment, began to be 
pitied, as being destroyed, not for the sake of the public 
welfare, but to gratify the cruelty of one man.' " 

These passages prove undoubtedly that a sect of per- 
sons called christians, were known at Rome in the days 
of Nero, which must have been before the destruction of 
Jerusalem ; viz. A. D. 68. Jerusalem was destroyed 
A. D. 70. Though these writers, who here speak of them, 
flourished about the close of the first, or the commence- 
ment of the second century. But it seems, judging from 
these writers, they bore a universally bad character : so bad, 
that it was worth the while of Nero to select them as the 
fittest persons to load with the obloquy of his own crime. 
The bad character of the early christians seems to be 
pretty generally admitted ; though if we had no proof of 
the fact, except what comes from their opponents, it would 
not be very conclusive ; for they criminated and recri- 
minated each other. The orthodox laid these practices 
with which they were generally charged, at the door of 
the christians, whom they called heretics ; but they were 
all heretics to each other.* 

* " These passages, however, prove no more ; than the prevailing opinions 
concerning the christians in the time of Tacitus and Suetonius ; the 
On dits of the day : for the christians were insignificant and too obscure 
(except from their bad conduct) to make it worth while to notice them in 
such a history or biography as that of Tacitus or Suetonius. These ex- 
tracts do not apply to, and prove nothing in corroboration of the accounts 
given by the evangelists. 

" Pliny the younger, wrote about the time of Tacitus and Suetonius. 
There are no means of deciding that the one wrote much before the other. 
If the letter of Pliny and the letter of Trajan be genuine, they prove ex- 
actly what the foregoing extracts from Tacitus and Suetonius prove, and 
no more : viz. that the christians began to attract notice in By thinia at that 
time. Pliny, Epist. lib. X. Epis. 97. Melmoth's Pliny is so common, that I 



88 LECTURE III. 

There is not an individual, who is even tolerably well 
read in ecclesiastical history, that does not know that the 
following propositions are as well established as any propo- 
sitions can be established by historical evidence. And to 
those who are satisfied with these, and search no further, 
but are tolerant towards all, even to those who set no 
bounds to their enquiries, as well as others, I would barely 
submit these remarks ; but with them I have no contro- 
versy. I can address them in the language of truth, 
which will apply in some measure to myself, as well as 
to my learned friend. " Many of them have labored 
honestly and diligently to understand m all its bearings 
this great theological question ; and having done so — if 
the prejudices of early education, the force of honored 
example, the constant admonitions and public professions 
of parents and preceptors, wise and good, and toward the 
youthful objects of their fostering care, kind and disinter- 
ested, have rivetted on their minds the theological belief 
which much and laborious reading and much and anxious 
reflection have taught me to reject — I can altew for the 
circumstances that operate on them, and not on myself ; 
I know the temptations to the clerical profession, from the 
world's reverence, however based on the ignorance of the 
multitude, or the prudent stimulation or timid hypocrisy 

do not think I need copy tbe letter and answer here. These letters are 
cited by Tertruliian and by Eusebiu* : as to Eusebius, he is absolutely no 
authority. But we know the dread of Trajan as to assemblies of the peo- 
ple, and as to secret assemblies in particular, and the letters are in har- 
mony with the characters of the time. But forgeries by the christians 
were so numerous and so daring, when there was no art of printiu ?, xo 
public press to check them, that suspicion is reasonably alive where there 
is any circumstance to support and corroborate it. The expression of 
Pliny, that the christian* were wont, hymnos Christo quasi Deo dicare 
[to recite hymns to Christ as to God,] expresses what could not have been 
matter of fact in Pliny's time, but what might have been so 150 or 300 
years afterward. 



EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 89 

of the wise ; I can understand the overwhelming force of 
the motives that decide its votaries ; I can excuse their 
professions, because I can account for their prejudices, and 
I am not blind to the powerful obstacles that oppose a 
change of opinion. It is not against the learned class of 
men, who are, I firmly believe, useful, honest, and sincere, 
in proportion to their learning, that I direct my harsh 
tirades ; it is against the ignorant, the insolent, the into- 
lerant among the calvinistic professors particularly ; and 
against the idle and comparatively illiterate episcopalians 
— it is against all those, and numerous they are, who are 
so ready to call out the bigotry of the country, and — 

To deal damnation through the land 
On each they judge a foe ; 

and who, having no tolerance themselves, have no right 
to expect it from others. Bellum internecinum, then, to 
those, and those only, who inscribe it on their own flag. 

" Throwing down, not the gauntlet, but the glove of 
courteous controversy to those who, being qualified, are 
willing to take it up, I proceed with my argument, and 
state my propositions, which I consider as now settled upon 
the basis of strong probable evidence. 

" The Nazarenes and Ebionites — the Alogi of Epi- 
phanius, entertained no such differences of opinions as to 
the nature and character of Jesus Christ, as to compel us 
to consider them other than as one and the same secc of 
christians. 

" They were the earliest Jewish converts. 

" They were generally considered as heretics by the 
writers of the close of the second, and the third centuries ; 
not on account of their opinions respecting Christ, but on 
account of their judaizing. Hieronym. Augustino, Ep. 89. 



90 LECTURE III. 

" They disbelieved the pre-existence and the divinity 
of Jesus Christ. 

"The oi pleistoi, the tous pollous, the toplethos, the 
oi polloi of Justin Martyr, Athanasius, Origen ; the sim- 
plices and ideotse of Tertullian, the simplices credentium 
of Jerom, the major pars credentium of Tertullian, the 
great mass of professing christians did not believe the 
pre-existence and divinity of Christ, for three centuries 
after Christ. They would have been shocked at such a 
doctrine until the council of Nice. Scandalizare, expaves- 
cere, tarassein, are the words used by Tertullian and 
Origen, when speaking of the effect on the multitude, 
which modern orthodoxy would in their day have pro- 
duced. 

" The first notice or suggestion of Jesus Christ being 
considered as God in any manner, is to be found in Justin 
Martyr, who died A. D. 163. 

" Athanasius, Chrysostom, and others vf the fathers, 
express their opinion that the divinity of Christ was a 
doctrine purposely kept back by the apostles, lest it should 
too much offend the prejudices of the early christians. 

" Nor was this doctrine established as the full belief of 
the orthodox church till the council of Nice. 

" Nor during the three first centuries, were the persons 
who held the modern unitarian opinions respecting Christ 
enumerated among the heretics. For, in fact, these opinions 
prevailed among the greater number of christians, Jew 
and Gentiles. The personification and apotheosis of the 
Logos, and the equality and consubstantiality of Jesus 
Christ, were the gradual and cautious innovations of the 
philosophizing christians, not generally prevalent till after 
the Nicene meeting. 

" All this is made out in the three first sections of Priest- 
ley's church history, in his controversy with Horsley, and 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 91 

his history of early opinions, by proofs so abundant, as to 
leave no room for controversy at the present day. The 
game that Horsley played, is now well understood ; and it 
was not much misunderstood at the time. He came for- 
ward a candidate for church promotion ; and was willing 
to risk his reputation, and cover his ignorance, by his im- 
pudence. 

" If these propositions be well founded, and I appeal to 
such as have attended to these controversies, without the 
slighest fear of contradiction, a strong suspicion arises, 
that the phrase hymnos Chrisio quasi deo, could not 
have applied to the christians of that day : and was 
meant to serve the cause of orthodoxy, and the whole 
passage is an interpolation by later theologians.* 

" But I acknowledge, the latinity of the letter in ques- 
tion, and Trajan's answer, as well as the sentiments 
uttered, the subjects treated, and the manner of consider- 
ing them, furnish no confirmation of this strong suspicion, 
si non e vero ) e hen trovato. 

" It proves, however, no more at the utmost, than that 
Christianity began to gain ground in Bythinia, when 
Pliny was in office in that part of Asia Minor. 

" There is no doubt, but the sect of christians were 
known at the close of the first century ; but we have no 
proof of the existence of this sect, anterior to the evidence 
furnished by Pliny, Tacitus, and Suetonius. This evi- 
dence is general, not particular : it fully proves, I think, 
the existence of a very abandoned and depravod set of 
men called christians about the years 100 — 110; but 
this is all. I regret the evidence compels me to uss thes« 
epithets, which seem applicable to the mass or body of 

* See the preceding note. 



92 LECTURE III. 

men so called, about that time, whoever, or how many 
soever may have been the exceptions. 

" Having now done with the Jewish and heathen 
records, I proceed to the ancient fathers of the church, on 
whose authority the authenticity of our present gospels 
rests. 

" But on bringing our witnesses into court, let us see 
whether we can establish the respectability of their cha- 
racters for veracity, good morals, good sense, and compe^ 
tent learning. The men by whose testimony the authen- 
city of the four evangelists must stand or fall, ought to 
be witnesses in all respects unexceptionable. Let us see, 
then, what the most learned and able of the christian 
writers have declared as their deliberate opinions concern- 
ing the ancient fathers of the church. 

" On this head, I believe my researches will enable me 
to furnish a more full, though brief account of the ancient 
fathers, than your readers will elsewhere find ; and I hope 
that they will bear in mind, that in proportion to the un- 
common character and importance of the fact to be proved, 
such ought to be the full and unsuspected nature of the 
evidence adduced to prove it. We cannot fix the wisdom 
of one blockhead by the testimony of another ; or prove 
tfse veracity of a liar by those who habitually practice 
falsehood and deception. Let us have unimpeached and 
unimpeachable testimony, or tell us why you cannot pro- 
cure it. f) 

Suetonius, Tacitus, and Pliny, were contemporary with 
each other. The whole of their writings, perhaps, were 
included between the years 100 and 120 of the christian 
era. But Tacitus certainly speaks of the christians 
which existed in the days of Nero, at the time of the burn- 
ing of Rome, and therefore his writing, if authentic,* 

* But see Note A. Appendix. 



EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 93 

proves something more than what the essayist admits ; 
viz. the bare existence of men called christians " about 
the years 100 — 110 f but also the existence of such men 
in the year 68 of the christian era. But even all this 
does not go to establish a single fact as to the extraordi- 
nary accounts in the New Testament. Writers may in- 
cidentally speak of the Shakers, and what does it prove ? 
Does it confirm the truth of any of the miracles recorded 
in the Shaker bible ? Certainly not. It only proves the 
existence of such a people. That is all. So the inciden- 
tal mention of the christians by Suetonius, Tacitus, and 
Pliny, barely prove the existence of a people called 
christians at the times of which they speak, as w^ell as 
at the time in which they lived. 

In our next I shall speak of the ancient fathers, as they 
are called, of the Christian Church ; and I regret that 
their characters do not stand more fair ; as the credibility 
of the gospels very much depends on the credibility of 
those through whose hands they come, down to the time 
of the oldest MSS now extant. 



lecture rr. 



OF THE ANCIENT FATHERS* 
" Prove all things ; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thes. v. 21. 

The truth of the Christian religion depends on the au- 
thenticity of the books that profess to give an account of 
it; for if these books be forgeries — or falsely ascribed to 
the pretended authors of them — or if no certainty exists 
who were the authors of them — or when they were writ- 
ten — or where — or in what language — if they were dis- 
puted, controverted, deuied, rejected, by a large part of the 
public at the first uid earliest age of their appearance — if 
they bear internal, as v«ll as external evidence of .mistakes 
and contradictions, of omissions, fabrications, and interpo- 
lations — if no care was taken to verify the evidence of 
their authenticity by the persons who first collected and 
sanctioned them as genuine — if the persons who so select- 
ed and sanctioned them, convened not for that purpose, 
but to serve the sectarian tenets of the theological party to 
which they belonged, and to promote their own secular 
and party interests, and to curry favor with a ruling mo- 
narch — then, in all, or in any of these cases, satisfactory 
evidence of the truth and authenticity of these Christian 
books is wanting ; no reasonable man at the present day 
ought to accept of them as genuine ; no honest man 
ought to gain his livelihood by supporting them. 

* [This lecture, also, is wholly borrowed, except what is inclosed in 
brackets.] 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 95 

But I aver, and I will prove, if I live and have leisure, 
that the four gospels ■, a9 they are called, are, • in fact, liable 
to all these objections. 

The historical authenticity of these books depends on 
the testimony, direct and indirect, in their favor, of a class 
of writers usually known as the ancient fathers of the 
Christian church. It will, therefore, be proper to enquire 
. who w T ere these ancient fathers — what credit is due to 
them for skill and acumen in distinguishing forged his- 
tories from genuine ones — what credit is due to them 
for honesty, veracity, and good faith, as well as good 
sense and intelligence ; and whether it be safe to adopt the 
evidences of our religious belief from these writers, and 
trust our religious journey through life, and our future ex- 
pectation afterwards, to ignorant and incompetent guides. 
It will be absolutely necessary, even at the expense of 
being tedious, to labour this point ; if these were wise and 
honest men, possessing and exercising a sound judgment, 
and discriminating with caution between the true and false 
lights of the day — then will the Christian fabric be able to 
sustain itself on this most important basis : but if these 
ancient fathers were, in point of learning, good serjse, labo- 
rious discrimination, and honest proceeding, utterly unfit 
to be trusted — if they perverted, misquoted, misapplied, 
defamed, defaced, and destroyed the works of their adver- 
saries, and even those of each other, so generally and so 
strangely that common sense and common honesty stand 
equally aghast at their follies and their frauds — (2 and 3 
Jortin's Remarks on Eccl. Hist. p. 305,) — if they were, as 
a class of writers, equally devoid of judgment and veracity, 
then is there no confidence to be placed in them ; their au- 
thentications are worthless, and the gospels whose histori- 
cal evidence rests entirelv on these men, must be consider- 
ed as void of all credible foundation. In giving the ac- 



96 LECTURE IV. 

count of these ancient fathers, I shall adduce no testimony 
but from Christian writers of the very highest standing in 
the Christian church for learning, honesty, and piety.* 

The book of the very learned Dr. Conycrs Middleton, 
entitled, a Fi^ee Enquinj into the miraculous powers at- 
tributed to the Christian church in the three first centu- 
ries ', quarto, 1747, although a professor at Cambridge uni- 
versity, is not relished by the orthodox clergy, and, there- 
fore, I do not quote it ; but the learning and research of 
this conclusive publication is such, that to those who will 
get it on my recommendation, it will supersede all other 
testimonies to tJie folly and the falsehood of the ancient 
fathers. It is, indeed, a very bold and decisive book. 

M. Daille, a man whose piety, learning, judgment, 
and impartiality, has never been impeached, wrote a trea- 
tise, Be usuPatrum, in judicandis Controversiis, (the title 
by which it is usually cited, but it was written in French,) 
in defence of the Protestant cause against the papists. He 
lays down, and fully establishes these points, and, for the 
proofs at length, I refer to his well known treatise on the 
right use of the fathers, above mentioned : 

1. We have very little of the writings of the fathers cf 
the three first centuries. 

2. The writings w r e have treat of matters very different 
from modern controversies. 

3. The writings ascribed to these fathers are not all ge- 
nuine, but are in great part forged, either anciently or in 
latter times. 

4. The writings of the fathers, which axe more truly 
ascribed to them, have been in many places corrupted ; 

* Ever? thing I read proves to me the truth of Bacon's observation, max- 
ima habenda pro suspectis, quae pendent aliquo modo a religione. Nov. 
Org. lib. 2. Aph. 29. 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 97 

through time, ignorance, and fraud, both pious and mali- 
cious, both in ancient and modern times. 

5. They are hard to be understood by reason of the 
language and idiom in which they are composed , by rea- 
son of the style incumbered with figures, rhetorical flou- 
rishes, and logical subtleties ; by reason of the terms em- 
ployed being used in a sense that they wall not now bear. 

6. When we meet with an opinion clearly delivered in 
the writings of any of the fathers, we must not from 
thence conclude it to be the opinion of the writer ; for we 
find them saying things which they did not believe them- 
selves. Whether it be when they report the opinions of 
some other whom they do not name, as is frequent in their 
Commentaries ; or whether it be in disputing against an 
adversary, when they scruple not to say one thing and be- 
lieve another ; or whether it be when they conceal their 
own opinion (as in their Homilies) in compliance with a 
part of their readers. 

7. There are many instances of their opinions at one 
time, being at variance with their opinions at another. 

8. It is necessary also to enquire,* whether the opinion 
be maintained as necessary, or as probable, and in what 
degree. 

9. Whether it be delivered as the opinion of the writer, 
or of the church in his day. 

10. Whether of the church universal, or of some par- 
ticular church or churches. 

11. Whether by church, the writer means the collective 
body of Christia7is, or of the clergy. 

In the second book he maintains these points : 

1. That neither the testimony or the doctrines of the 
fathers are infallible. 

2. The fathers are mutually witnesses against each 

9 



98 LECTUHE IV. 

other, that they are not to be believed absolutely on their 
own bare word. 

3. It appears by their writings, that it was never intend- 
ed those writings should govern us. 

4. They have erred in divers points, both singly and 
collectively. 

5. They have contradicted each other in matters of 
great importance. 

In book 1, chapter 3, he observes, " neither ought we 
to wonder that those of honest, innocent, and primitive 
times, made use of those deceits, seeing that for a good 
end they made no scruple to forge whole books." 

In book 1, chapter 6, alleging that the fathers, by way 
of economy of dispensation, often say one thing and 
mean another, he observes, " Origen, Methodius, Euse- 
bius, Apoliinaris, (says Jerom,) have written largely 
against Celsus and Porphyry. Do but observe, says Jerom, 
their manner of arguing, and what slippery problems they 
used. They alleged against the Gentiles, not what they 
believed, but what they thought necessary ; non quod 
sentiunt, sed quod necesse est dicunt. Jerom adds, I 
forbear mentioning the Latin writers, as Tertullian, Cy- 
prian, Minutius, Victorinus, Lactantius, and Hilary, lest I 
should rather seem to accuse others than defend myself." 

Here is, indeed, a sweeping accusation by one of the 
gang, particeps criminis ; for 1 shall soon show that Jerom 
was not backward in imitating the example of his pious 
predecessors. Jerom goes on in continuation of the above 
passage, justifying his own practice by charging not only 
St. Paul, but Jesus Christ himself, with the same.* 

Daille was a man of singular eminence among the 
learned French Protestants: he was born Jan. 1594. He 

* Hicron. in Epist. ad Galat. Epist 50, ad rammach. Ad. Aug. Fp. 89. 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 99 

died Ap. 1670. His book on the Use of the Fathers, 
was published in 1628. It was translated in 1651, by 
Thomas Smith, of Cambridge; and into Latin by M. 
Mettayer, of St. Quintin. I have the translation by Mr. 
T. Smith, from which I quote. 

M. Blondell, another French Protestant, (in Epist. 
ad C. Arnold, apud Ouvrages des Scavans, Ann. 1701,) 
observes on the subject of creeds, " the second century of 
Christianity, whether you consider the immoderate impu- 
dence of impostors, or the deplorable credulity of believers, 
was a most miserable period, and exceeded all others in 
pious frauds. To the disgrace of Christianity, there was 
more aversion to lying, more simplicity in adhering to 
truth, and more fidelity among profane than among Chris- 
tian authors." 

Scaliger says of the Christians of those days, " What- 
ever they deemed conducive to the interests of Christian- 
ity, they inserted in their books ;"* and as he considers no- 
thing relating to the church as certain anterior to Pliny, 
so he says of the second century, " So inefficacious did 
they deem the word of God, that they distrusted the suc- 
cess of Christ's kingdom without the aid of lying, that I 
wish they had been the first to practice it."f 

Casaubon himself says, " I am much grieved to ob- 
serve, in the early ages of the church, that there were 
very many who deemed it praiseworthy to assist the divine 
word with their own fictions ; so that the new doctrine 
might find a readier admittance among the wise men of 
the Gentiles."! 

* (Scaligerana, art. Siloe,) omnia qua putabant christianismo conducere, 
bibliis inseruere. 

t Adeo verbum dei inefficax esse consuerunt, ut regnum Christi one 
mendacio promoveri posse diffiderunt, ut qui utinam illi primi mentiri 
coepissent. 

t (Exercit 1; ad Append, p. 54, a.) Illud me vehementir mevk, quod 



100 LECTURE IV. 

Bishop Stillingfleet, in his Irenarch, page 296, 
saytf, that antiquity is most defective where it is most use- 
ful, viz. in the times immediately after the apostles ; for 
the fathers were deceived with pious frauds, but then it 
was when they made for the Christians, Origines sacrae, 
page 29. 

Bishop Fell says, " In the first ages of the church, 
so extensive was the license of forging, so credulous were 
the people in believing, that the evidence of transactions 
was grievously obscured ; and not only did the public com- 
plain universally, but the church of God in particular 
lamented with great reason, these mystic times."* Who 
does Bishop Fell call the church of God ? Were not all 
these forgeries committed by Christians ? Did any hea- 
then condescend to take the trouble off their hands ? 

To the same purpose Dr. Whitby, inproefat. ad strict, 
patr. page 73. 

To the same purpose also Le Clerc, Biblioth. Choise, 
torn. iv. p. 315. 

« 'Tis well known," says Dr. Bennet, (directions for 
studying the 39 articles, page 66,) " that the apostles creed 
'has received various additions to its original form. The 
Nicene creed was enlarged by the Constantinopolitan 
fathers ; and has also with respect to the jilioqiie, [and the 
son,] been interpolated by the Latin church. 'Tis proba- 
ble that the Latin church hath interpolated the Athanasian 
creed too with respect to the filioque J 



oidcam primis ecclesiae temporibus quam plurimos extitisse, qui facinus 
palmarium judicabant coelestem veritatem figmentis suis ire adjutum ; quo 
facilius nova ilia doctrina gentium. 

* (In proemiss. monit. confess, suppos. Cypriani, page 53,) Tanta fuit 
primis sseculis fingendi licentia, tam prona in credendo facilitas, ut rerum 
gestarum fides exinde graviter labora verit : nee orbis tantum terrarum, 
sed et Dei ecclesia, de temporibus suis mysticis merito queratur. 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 101 

Bishop Burnet hath shown (on the Articles, art. 8, 
page 106 ; ) that the Athanasian creed was a forgery of the 
eighth century. 

Selden, in his notes on Fleta, chapter 5, n. 6, men- 
tions the fraudulent introduction of a rescript of Constan- 
tine into the Theodoeian cod*, after that rescript (On the 
power of Bishops) had been long repealed. 

Celsus (Orig. versus Celsum, lib. 2, page 77,) says, the 
Christians are perpetually altering and correcting the gos- 
pels. That the more ancient fathers of the second and 
third centuries cite perpetually as genuine, books that are 
now universally conceded to be forgeries, is acknowledged 
by Lardner, 2 Credib. pages 109, 383, 423, 431, 500, 505, 
508, 521. Dr. Con. Middleton, in his " Free Enquiry," 
furnishes proof of the same, pages 33, 34. 

There is a singular passage in the Chronicon of the 
African Bishop Victor Muis, who flourished in the sixth 
century, that confirms the accusation of Celsus. The 
Abbe Houteville, in his treatise on the Christian religion, 
cites it, and endeavors to evade the force of it. " The 
Emperor Anastasius, in the consulship of Messala, ordered 
the holy gospels to be revised and corrected, as having 
been composed by men wanting in good sense."* 

Pezron, in his defence of his book L'Antiquite des 
Terns, page 224, acknowledges, that among the ancient 
Christians, lying for God and religion was deemed by 
many no crime at all, or a very pardonable one, if not me- 
ritorious. 

The learned Mr. Dodwell, in his Dissert, de Paucit 
Martyr. Inter. Dissertationes Cyprianicas, abstains from 
producing more proofs of ancient Christian forgeries, 
through his great veneration of the goodness and piety of 

* Messala Consule, Anastasio Imperatore jubente, sancta evangelia, tan- 
quam ab ideotis evangelistis composita, reprehenduntur et emendantur. 

9* 



102 LECTURE IV. 

several of the fathers ; who were too easy of belief of mat- 
ters of fact not sufficiently attested. 

In fact, the early Christians, from the end of the first to 
the end of the third century, appear to have had among 
them a general propensity to lying, fraud, and forgery ; a 
propensity peculiar to the quarrelsome disputants in theo- 
logy, and found in no other class of writers. 

Dodwell, in his Dissert, upon Irenseus, seems to hesi- 
tate upon our present gospels. " We have, at this day, 
(says he,) certain most authentic ecclesiastical writers of 
the times, as Clemens Romanus, Barnabas, Hermas, Ig- 
natius, and Polycarp, who wrote in the same order wherein 
I have named them, and after all the writers of the New 
Testament. But in Hermas you will not find one passage, 
or any mention of the New Testament, nor in all the rest 
is any one of the evangelists named. If sometimes they 
cite passages like those we read in our gospels, you will 
find them so changed, and for the most part so interpo- 
lated, that it cannot be known whether they produced 
them out of ours, or some apocryphal gospels. Nay, they 
sometimes cite passages which most certainly are not in 
our present gospels." 

All the writings ascribed to these early fathers are far 
from being authentic, nor are the dates or times of their 
writings perfectly settled. They reach from an early date 
in the second century to about 120, according to orthodox 
computations. In none of them is there any distinct re- 
ference to the gospels now received, or to the authors of 
them, which would have been next to impossible if those 
books had been then known. Matthew, Mark, Luke, and 
John, never said they wrote any thing — none of the gos- 
pels ascribed to them were ever acknowledged by them: — 
nor are the names of Matthew, Mark, Luke, or John, ever 
mentioned or alluded to in that connexion before the days 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. li)u 

of Irenaeus, who died in the year 202 of our present era, 
and whose writings cannot date earlier than 180. Lard- 
ner thiaks 173 rather too early. It is no wonder, there- 
fore, that an honest and learned man like Bodwell, Chris- 
tian as he was, should express himself doubtingly. 

In the controversy between Dr. Joseph Priestley and 
Bishop Horsley, (then archdeacon of St. Albans,) the for- 
mer, in letter 4. p. 45, of his letters to the archdeacon of 
St. Albans, 1784, has the following passage : " I cannot 
help taking some farther notice of what you say with re- 
spect to this charge of a wilful falsehood on Origen. Time 
was, you say, {page 160,) when the practice (of using 
unjustifiable means to serve a good end) was openly 
avowed, and Origen himself was among its defenders. 
This, sir, as is usual with you, is much too strongly stated, 
and as you mention no authorities, you might think to 
escape detection. I believe, indeed, you went no farther 
than Mosheim for it. Jerom, in his Epist. to Pemma- 
chius Oper. vol. 1, page 496, says, that Origen adopted 
the Platonic doctrine of the subserviency of truth to uti- 
lity, as with respect to deceiving enemies, &c. as Mr. 
Hume, and other speculative moralists, have done, consi- 
dering the foundation of all social virtue to be the public 
good. But, sir, it by no means follows, from this, that 
such persons will ever indulge themselves in any greater 
violations of truth than those who hold other speculative 
opinions concerning the foundation of morals. Jerom was 
far from saying as you do, that he reduced his theory to 
practice. He mentions no instance whatever of his hav- 
ing recourse to it, and is far, indeed, from vindicating you 
in asserting, page 160, the art vihich he recommended 
he scrupled not to employ ; and that to silence an ad- 
versary he had recourse to the wilful and deliberate 
allegation of a notorious falsehood" 



104 LECTURE IV. 

I regret that Priistley, who was an honest man as far 
as his religious prejudices would permit him, should be so 
biassed by them as to defend Origen and Jerom, as he does, 
in this abominable practice. What ! because custom well 
understood, permits me to say at the bottom of my letter 
to a correspondent, I am, sir, your most obedient servant, 
does this authorize me to lie, and deceive the public in the 
discussion of a public question ? No doubt, all morality 
is founded on public utility ; and therefore it is, that truth 
is the first of moral obligations. No truth is infringed by 
the common conclusion to a letter ; no truth that the pub- 
lic ought to insist on, is infringed, when a madman, with 
a drawn sword, is rendered harmless without injury to any 
one ; no truth is infringed when an enemy is deceived in 
war: why? because, by public and universal consent, 
truth au pied de lettre, is not expected in these cases : 
they are cases allowed as exceptions. But do these excep- 
tions annihilate the general rule? This is a passage 
which I regret to see from the pen of that good man, and 
which is to be ascribed to his Christian prejudices only. 

Did Dr. Priestley know nothing of the practice of lying 
as a branch of economy and dispensation by Origen ? 
Did he ever read through that epistle to Pammachius 
which he cites ? If he did, he would have found in that 
very epistle justification enough for Dr. Horsley. Did 
Dr. Priestley never read the chapter in Eusebius, how it 
may be lawful and fitting to use falsehood as a medi- 
cine, and for the benefit of those who want to be de- 
ceived ? to which I have already referred the editor of the 
Correspondent, with page and edition, more than once ; 
and which may be found referred to in Gibbon's Vindica- 
tion of his 15th and 16th chapters, page 130. Dr. Priest- 
ley ought to have known this before he cast such an im- 
putation on Horsley, who, if he borrowed from Mosheim, 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 105 

borrowed from an author whose accuracy and impartiality 
is as firmly established as that of any writer in the whole 
range of literature. 

But the most astonishing thing of all is, that Dr. Priest- 
ley had himself made the same assertion respecting the 
ancient fathers, and respecting Origen himself, as Bishop 
Horsley has made ; and that, too, on the authority of Mo- 
sheim. in the year 1777, and again in 1782, as the follow- 
ing passage will testify. Disquisitions relating to Matter 
and Spirit, second edition, vol. 1, page 393, note. The 
first edition was in 1777 ; the second 1782. " Another 
vice (says Dr. Priestley) of most pernicious consequence, 
the Christians of the second and third centuries seem to 
have derived from the maxims of the philosophers,* but 
because it does not relate to the subject of this work, ex- 
cept so far as it shows in general the hurtful connexion of 
Christianity and philosophy, (!) I shall insert it in a note. 
It is the lawfulness of lying to promote a good cause. 

" Timceus Locris, the master of Pythagoras, says, that 
as we use poisons to cure men's bodies, if wholesome re- 
medies will not do, so we restrain men's minds by false- 
hoods, if they will not be led with truth. Mosheim's Dis- 
sertations, page 195. Plato gave into the same vice, (page 
156,) and in his book, De Republica, he says, the chiefs 
of a city may deceive the rest for their good, but that others 
ought to abstain from lying. (Page 199.) On this ac- 
count, when Christianity prevailed, the Platonic philoso- 
phers endeavored, by feigned accounts of P}*thagoras, and 
other early philosophers, to eclipse Christianity, setting up 
their characters and actions as if they had been superior 

* Have I not furnished you with superabundant proof that they might 
easier have derived it from the inculcations and practices of the Old and 
the New Testament 1 Is not St. Paul authority suiFicient ? [I cannot 
admit that he is, and think that he must have been misunderstood.] 



10G LECTURE IV. 

to Christ. Hence the wi kings ascribed to Hermes and 
Zoroaster, and hence some think those of Sanconiatho to 
discredit those of Moses, p. 199. 

" But the greatest misfortune was, that those Christians 
who embraced the Platonic principles in other respects, 
received this also, and thought it innocent and commenda- 
ble to lie for the sake of truth ; hence came so many forged 
gospels, and other writings of a similar nature, which did 
not appear till after the era of the incorporation of philoso- 
phy with Christianity ; (ibid, page 200 ;) Origen, in par- 
ticular, avowed this principle, (page 203 y ) and also Chry- 
sostom, (page 205.)" 

When theological studies and doctrines can thus pervert 
the understanding of so able a man, and the disposition 
of so good a man as Priestley, it is nothing in their favor. 
That Priestley, the philosopher, should abuse the alliance 
between Christianity and philosophy — that he should sneer 
at Horsley for accusing Origen on the evidence adduced 
by Mosheim, after having himself abused Origen on the 
very same account, and on the very same evidence, is not 
a little strange. As to his charging the gnostic or plato- 
nizing Christians with the current forgeries of the day, 
there is nothing strange in that. Politicians are divided 
into two great classes, the ins and the outs ; theologians 
are also divided into two similar classes, the orthodox and 
the heterodox. Orthodoxy, said Bishop Warburton to 
Lord Sandwich, in a debate on the corporation and test 
acts — orthodoxy, my lord, is my doxy ; heterodoxy is an- 
other man's doxy. 

The plittonizing orthodox Christians, the embryo Tri- 
nitarians of the second, who grew up during the third and 
fourth centuries, were Dr. Priestley's heretics ; they were 
gnostic, philosophic idolaters, to him. He, with his Ebio- 
nites, Nazarenes. and Alogi, were heretics and heterodox 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 107 

to them. Priestley lays all the forgeries to the charge of 
the orthodox ; they declare all the forgeries known were 
the forgeries of the heretics ; the real truth is, they were 
the forgeries of the Christians ; they began at the close 
of the first century, and have continued from that time to 
the Episcopal forgery in the Lambeth books, preserving 
the succession of bishops, the interpolation relating to th*» 
power of the church to decide on matters of faith, in the 
thirty-nine articles detected by Collins, the miracles at 
Holywell, and the prayers of Prince Hohenloe. 

I shall close this general charge with the opinions of 
Mosheim on each of the principal fathers in succession. 
Mosheim is a writer to whom all sects and all parties in 
modern times appeal with perfect confidence in hk learn- 
ing and honesty. No more honorable testimony can be 
afforded of this, than that such inveterate opponents as 
Priestley and Horsley, should deem it m£iciesjt to appeal 
to Mosheim without stating their original authorities. 

Mosheim, in his treatise De rebus Ckristianis ante 
Constantinum magnum, [concerning the Christians be- 
fore Constantine the Great,] at the close of IiB recount of 
Hennas, at the end of the first century, observes in a 
note as follows : — (See Vidal's Translation, vol. i, page 
285, note o.) 

" Several tilings, which I cannot well enter into in this 
place, conspire to impress xne with the opinion, that Her- 
mas could never have been so far the dupe of a hoftted. 
imagination, as to fancy that he saw and heard things 
which in reality had no existence, but J hat he knowingly 
and wilfully was guilty of a cheat, and invented those 
divine conversations and visions which he asserts himself 
to have enjoyed, with a view to obtain a more ready recep- 
tion for certain precepts and admonitions which he con- 
ceived would prove salutary to the Roman church. At 



i08 LECTCSft IV. 

the time when he wrote, it was an established maxim 
with many of the Christians, that it was 'pardonable 
in an advocate for religion to avail himself of fraud 
and deception, if it were likely they might conduce 
toioard the attainment of any considerable good. Of 
the host of silly books and stories to which this erroneous 
notion gave rise, from the second to the fifteenth century, 
no one acquainted with Christian history can be ignorant. 
The teachers of the Romish church themselves, appear to 
have considered Hennas as having written his work on 
this principle, and not to have altogether disapproved i(. 
For, as we have seen above, they permitted his book to be 
circulated and perused with a view to private edification, 
but would not allow it to be read publicly in the assem- 
blies of the church. (This observation relates to the go- 
vernors of the Romish church in the second century : see 
note n.) From their refusal of the latter, it may fairly be 
inferred, that they did not regard the visions of Hermas, 
or the precepts and advice of the angel, with whom he 
pretended to have conversed, in the light of divine com- 
munications ; but their acquiescing in the former, very 
plainly shows, that the kind of fiction to which this author 
had recourse, appeared to them such as was unwarranta- 
ble ; and that they did not think it unjustifiable to practise 
imposition on the multitude in the way of instruction ; or 
to invent pious stories for the sake of commanding their 
attention. Had they believed Hermas to have written 
under the influence of divine communication, they would 
not have dared to deny his work a place among the sacred 
writings, and pronounce it unfit to be read in public. On 
the other hand, had they felt indignant at the cheat prac- 
tised by him, or disapproved of the guile to which he had 
recourse, unquestionably they would never have recom- 
mended the perusal of his work to Christians in private, 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 109 

as useful to confirm their piety." I wonder Archbishop 
Wake never thought of this. How well does all this rea- 
soning of Mosheim apply to his translation of the aposto- 
lic fathers ! Mosheim, speaking of the forged writings 
attributed to Hermes Trismegistus, says, "many other 
deceptions of this sort, to which custom has most impro- 
perly given the name of pious frauds, are known to have 
been practised in the second and third centuries ; the au- 
thors of them were probably actuated by no ill intention, 
but nothing can be said in their favor, for their conduct in 
this respect was certainly unwarrantable and unwise. Al- 
though the greater part of those who were concerned in 
these forgeries on the public, belonged, no doubt, to some 
heretical sect or other, and particularly to that class that 
denominated itself Gnostic. I cannot take upon me to 
acquit even the most strictly orthodox of all participation 
in this species of criminality. For it appears from evi- 
dence beyond all exception, that a pernicious maxim cur- 
rent in the schools of the Egyptians, Platonists, Pythago- 
reans and Jews, became early recognised by the Chris- 
tians, and soon found among them numerous patrons, 
namely, that they who made it their business to deceive 
with a view of promoting the cause of truth, were deserv- 
ing rather of commendation than censure. See what I 
have collected with regard to this in my dissertation. De 
turbata per recentiores platonicos Ecclesia? 

In toI. 1, page 135, of VidaPs translation, Mosheim 
says, " according to ancient report, quoted by Eusebius 
from Apollinaris, & writer in the second century, our Sa- 
viour ordered his disciphs to stay at Jerusalem for twelve 
years after his parting from them. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. 
5, ch. 18. Clem. Alex, expredicatione peti Strom, lib. 6, 
chapter 5, page 762." Considering the great antiquity of 
this account, (Mosheim should have added if Eusebius 

10 



110 LECTURE IV. 

can be relied on,) " it may not be altogether undeserving 
of credit ; but, at the same time, we cannot help regard- 
ing it with some suspicion, since it is certain, that even in 
the earliest ages of Christianity, it was no uncommon 
thing for men to fill up the chasms of genuine history 
with fictitious conceits, the mere suggestions of their own 
imaginations." 

Dr. Chapman, in his Miscellaneous Tracts, pages 191 
207, says, " the learned Mosheim, also a foreign divine, 
and zealous advocate for Christianity, who, by his wri- 
tings, has deserved the esteem of all good and learned 
men, intimates his fears that those who search with any 
degree of attention into the writings and most holy doctors 
of the fourth century, will find them all, without exception, 
disposed to deceive and lie whenever the interest of reli- 
gion requires it." See also Middleton's Free Enquiry, 
161. 

If these things be so, what reliance can be placed on 
the Christian authors of the three first centuries after 
Christ ? There is absolutely no evidence whatever for 
the books of the New Testament called the gospels, but 
these very men. That these books existed substantially, 
is known only as a possible or probable conclusion from 
Muttered passages in the writings of these fathers of the 
church, which are so similar in many instances to passages 
in our modern New Testament, that Christians have con- 
cluded they belonged to that book. But as books now 
acknowledged by all to be forgeries, are quoted by these 
ancient fathers as genuine, there is no knowing from what 
or whose writings the quotations in question are taken ; 
especially as Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John, are cited 
by name by no author whatever anterior to Irenaeus, who 
wrote about 180, and died 202 of our era. 

It is of great importance, however, to go through with 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. Ill 

these fathers, one by one, and to ascertain the character of 
each of them. The question of Christianity rests abso- 
lutely on this enquiry ; for if the only men who have 
borne testimony to the authenticity of these gospels are 
men who are in no case worthy of credit — some being de- 
ficient in common sense, mere drivellers — almost all of 
them in common honesty as writers — if none of them 
have taken, and few of them were capable of taking, due 
pains to ascertain whether the writings called the gospels 
were genuine or not — if it be known to a certainty, even 
at this day, that these writings underwent additions, inter- 
polations, curtailments, and forgeries of all kinds, to serve 
the peculiar views, and promote the peculiar doctrines of 
the very men on whom alone the evidence of their authen- 
ticity depends — what reasonable man can put faith in 
these gospels, or acknowledge them as honest guides for 
his belief, either as to matter of fact, or matter of doc- 
trine? 

I hope, therefore, that those, who really desire to get to 
the bottom of this question, will bear with me while I go 
through the catalogue raisonnee of the men who are 
called the ancient fathers of the Christian church ; those 
burning and shining lights, so necessary to illuminate the 
cloudy understandings of the many sected followers of 
Christ ; of whose existence, sayings, and doings, w r e know 
nothing but from these Christian fathers. 

[But if such be the general character of the ancient 
fathers of the Christian church, what confidence can 
be placed in them ? and if the gospels were exclusively 
in their hands for several centuries, what can we now 
know about them ? But we shall examine the fathers se- 
parately, and see if an individual among them can be 
found through whom the gospels might have passed with- 
out alteration, or whether any of them are any thing bet- 



112 LECTURE IV. 

ter than made up stories, ail based on one and the same 
tradition, but, in detail, chiefly made up for the occasion ; 
and much that is contained in each of them, is not found 
in the others, nor in any other account.] 



MECTURE V. 



ACCOUNT OP THE ANCIENT FATHERS CONTINUED. 
" Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thes. ▼. 21. 

[I shall still follow my learned friend, Philo Veritas, in- 
terlarding here and there a sentence, or a paragraph, 
always apprising the audience, when I thus speak, that 
the hearer may be able to distinguish the statements of 
Veritas from commentaries of my own.*] 

The authors of the two first centuries who have been 
dignified as fathers of the church, and whose writings, or 
notices of them, are supposed to have reached us, are Bar- 
nabas, who is said to have written about A. D. 71. Cle- 
mens Romanus, 96. The shepherd of Hermas, 100. St. 
Ignatius, 107. Polycarp, 108. Papias, known only by 
some extracts in Eusebius, 116. Justin Martyr, 140. Ta- 
tian, 172. Hegisippus, 173. Melito, 177. The epistles 
to Vienne and Lyons, 177. Irenseus, 178 or 180. Athe- 
nagoras, 178. Theophilus of Antioch, 181. Pantoenus, 
192. All these dates are conjectural ; settled upon what 
christian writers deem probabilities, with no certain evi- 
dence to guide us to the most part of them. 

Justin Martyr died 163. Irenseus, 202. Clemens Alex- 
andrinus, 220. Origen, 259. Cyprian, 258. Lactantkw 

• [The reader will also distinguish my own commentaries from those of 
Veritas, by being inclosed in brackets.] > 

10* 



114 LECTURE V. 

wrote about 311. Eusebius Pamphilus died 340. Atha- 
nasius died 371. Cyrill, 386. Basil, 378. Gregory of 
Nyssa, 395. Ambrose, 397. Chrysostom, 407. Jerom 
420. Augustin, 430. Beyond these it is not worth while 
to enumerate. By this time, the orthodox faith, not much 
different from what is so called in modern days, was fully 
established, under the sanction of imperial authority. 

For the accounts I give of the writers of the two first 
centuries, I refer generally to VidaPs translation of Mo- 
sheim de rebus Christianis, ante Const. Mag. — to the two 
first volumes of Dr. Jortin's Remarks on Ecclesiastical 
History — to the Eccles. Hist, of Lewis Ellis Dupin, and 
to the " Free Enquiry" of Dr. Conyers Middleton, whose 
accuracy of references has never been attacked by the most 
inveterate of his opponents. These are books not diffi- 
cult to be procured ; they are books composed by chris- 
tian writers of established character. The treatise of 
Barbeyrac, (the French translator of Grotius de jure belli 
et pacis.) sur la morale des peres de l'ancien Eglise, I pre- 
sume no learned man, no lawyer at least, will hesitate to 
admit. 

Barnabas. There is an epistle, says Dr. Jortin, (vol 
1, page 217,) ascribed to Barnabas ; we cannot certainly 
tell by whom it was written. If it really were written by 
St. Paul's companion, there are internal characters in it, 
tliat incline us to judge that he was not at that time under 
any particular guidance of the Holy Spirit. Jortin, ib. 
page 218, 219.* 

Clemens Romanus. Two epistles in Greek are as- 
cribed to this writer, of which the first may be considered 
genuine in the main, but greatly interpolated ; the latter 

* [It is now pretty well ascertained, that the epistle of Barnabas was 
written as late as A. D. 130 or 131. See Ancient History of Universalism, 
P«ge 31] 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 115 

very questionable. Other forged writings attributed to 
him, are eight books of the apostolic constitutions ; a set 
of apostolic canons ; the recognitions of St. Clement ; the 
homilies of St. Clement: Mosheim de Reb. Chr. vol. 1, 
page 270 of Vidal. Clemens urges the story of the phe- 
nix as a true story, and a type and proof of the resurrec- 
tion from the dead. Who Clement was, is by no means 
settled. Wake's Ap. Fath. Prelim. Disc. § 7. 

The Shepherd of Hermas. Is a production dating 
about the middle of the second century, falsely ascribed 
to Hermas, brother to Pius, said to have been bishop of 
Rome about the close of the first century ; but this is all 
uncertain. " The shepherd of Hermas, so called, (says 
Mosheim,) ib. 284, contains such an admixture of folly 
and superstition with piety, such a ridiculous association 
of egregious nonsense with things momentous and useful, 
that to me (Mosheim) it appears clftarly to be the work of 
eome disordered fanatic ; or of some man, who, from a 
pious motive, conceived himself authorized in pretending 
to have derived his maxims and precepts from conversa- 
tions with God and the angels." How Archbishop Wake 
could gravely publish the apostolical fathers for the edifica- 
tion of pious christians, no one but an orthodox church- 
man can explain. 

Ignatius. (VidaFs Mosheim, vol. 1, page 274.) "There 
are extant several epistles with the name of Ignatius pre- 
fixed to them, but their authenticity has been much dis- 
puted. The prevailing opinion, however, is in favor of six 
of them." Mosheim says, six or seven of them have in 
them something of a genuine cast, (page 276, note k,) 
but, under the present circumstances, let us endeavor what 
we may, we shall never exonerate these letters form suspi- 
cion of corruption and interpolation ; the question of their 
genuineness remains undecided. (Page 277.) 



116 LECTURE V. 

Vol. 2, page 51. The acts of Martyrdom of St. Igna- 
tius are interpolated. But the dreams and visions of his 
friends, and, indeed, the whole story, is incredible. Arch- 
bishop Wake has inserted it in his apostolical fathers, and 
a good companion it is to the Pastor of Hermas. Any 
man of common sense, who has not a cause to serve, will 
agree with Mosheim that the whole story is incredible. 

Polycarp. Vidal's Mosheim, vol. 1, page 278. Of 
Polycarp, Bishop of Smyrna, we have an epistle to the 
Philippians, considered by some as spurious, by others as 
genuine. Mosheim considers it as corrupted, interpolated, 
and containing passages trifling, absurd, and contradictory, 
(lb. note 1.) The lying wonders detailed of his martyr- 
dom may be found in 1 Jortin Rem. on Ecc. Hist. 333. 
It requires a very full share of orthodox faith to credit 
them. How Archbishop Wake could reconcile it to his 
conscience to leave out the miracle of the dove, I cannot 
tell ; more especially as he declares Bishop Usher's MS., 
which contains it, to be too well attested to be doubted. I 
do not know much difference between the pious frauds of 
purposed omission lest the truth should be suspected, and 
purposed interpolation to gain credit to a pious story. See 
Dr. Middleton's Free Enquiry, page 154, &c. 

Papias. Supposed to be a disciple of John, and 
Bishop of Hierapolis : he is little known, except from what 
Eusebius has collected concerning him. I object generally 
to the testimonies of Eusebius, as a professed forger, fabri- 
cator, interpolator, and deceiver. Credat Judaeus Apella, 
non ego : let the orthodox christian give credit to this his- 
torian, I give none ; unless where the facts are credible in 
themselves, and can serve no pious fraud ; if they can, 
the ready lie is at the end of his pen. Dr. Whitby, whose 
learning and fairness stands deservedly high, joins Ire- 
naeus with Papias, (Proefat. ad strictur. Patr. page 73.) 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 117 

* It is very remarkable, (says Whitby,) that these two ear- 
liest writers of the second century, who, on the credit of 
idle reports, and uncertain fame, have delivered to us 
things said to be done by the apostles and their scholars, 
and have shamefully imposed upon us by the forgery of 
fables and false stories." Eusebius, to my surprise, speaks 
of Papias much in the language of Dr. Whitby, as to his 
fables and forgeries, and calls him " a weak and silly man." 
Euseb. Hist. Ecc. lib. 3, ch. 39. 

The Sybilline verses are considered as a forgery of 
Papias. 

Here ends the list of what are called the apostolical 
fathers. Archbishop Wake's translation of what he is 
pleased to call their genuine epistles, with the accounts of 
the martyrdom of Ignatius and Polycarp, (equally vera- 
cious,) has undergone five or six editions, greatly to the 
edification of all pious and orthodox old women, and not 
much to the honor of the pious and right reverend trans- 
lator. 

The christian gospels, if they can be authenticated, 
must be authenticated by the references to them, and by 
the acknowledgment of them, and appeals to them, of wri- 
ters near to their times, and when the publication of these 
gospels would naturally create much conversation, much 
citation, and much public interest in all christian churches, 
and among all pious christians. The poor, tasteless dri- 
vellers whom I have noticed, and whom Wake has trans- 
lated, are the only christian writers near to the apostolic 
times ; that is, about 60 — 100 years after the apostles. But 
even the writings of these apostolic fathers are all suspect- 
ed, in whole or in part, by christian literati of high re- 
pute ; they are undoubtedly mutilated and interpolated ; as 
such we have them : even Wake has condescended to mu- 
tilation by omission. But be they genuine or not, not one 



118 LECTURE V. 

of them authenticates ) or even mentions any of our ex- 
isting gospels, in substance or by name. 

[What have we here ? All the christian fathers of the 
first century ; and one enumerated above, to wit, Barna- 
bas, I think, with Dr. Priestley and others, was evidently 
of the second century, and " not one of them authenti- 
cates, or even mentions any of our existing gospels, in 
substance or by name !" If it had been known that any 
of the disciples of Jesus had written an account of his life, 
miracles, doctrine, death, and resurrection, would no one, 
for forty years and upwards, (from 63 to 116 of the chris- 
tian era,) have made mention of these books, and of their 
authors, in such a manner as to have put the matter be- 
yond all dispute ? But nothing of the kind. " We must, 
therefore, go farther, and to still more suspicious times."] 

The next christian writer in order of time is Justin 
Martyr. Of the works ascribed to him in this age of 
forgery, none are considered as genuine but his dialogue 
with Trypho, and his apologies. 1 Jortin. Rem. Ecc. 
Hist. 205. 

He affirms, that prophetic gifts, and extraordinary pow- 
ers, subsisted in the church in his time ; that the gift of ex- 
pounding the scriptures was conferred on himself by the 
special grace of God. He says the affairs of this world 
could not be carried on but by means of the form of the 
cross. The sea could not be passed, or the earth tilled 
without it. That the form of a man is that of the cross 
by the erection of his body, the extension of his arms, and 
the projection of his nose. Then he goes on to apply all 
the sticks and pieces of wood mentioned in the Old Testa- 
ment, to the cross of Christ. Of such silly fancies are his 
works greatly composed, yet does he insist upon their hav- 
ing been divinely suggested to him, and appeals to the 
Jews whether he could have acquired otherwise such a 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 119 

perfect knowledge of the scripture ? Yet he was perfectty 
ignorant of Hebrew. He declares that all good christians 
believe in the millenium, wherein they are to enjoy all 
sensual pleasures for a thousand years previous to the ge- 
neral resurrection. A doctrine which he deduces from 
the prophets, and from John the apostle, and in which he 
is followed by all the fathers of the second and third cen- 
turies. He asserts that God made the world, gave the 
care of it to angels, who fell in love with women, and 
corrupted boys, and spread terror among men. He pro- 
fesses great regard for the Sybilline books, (now known to 
be spurious,) and Hytaspes, and appeals to them as 
divinely inspired writings, and says, that by the contri- 
vance of demons it was made a capital crime to read 
them. These forgeries received currency from the autho- 
rity of Justin, and others of the early fathers. He asserts 
the divine inspiration of the Septuagint version. He 
confounded and mistook the Sabine deity Semo Sanchus 
with Simon Magus. He is charged by Crowe (Croius) 
with having forged a passage in Esdras, and accused by 
Thirlby of the utmost negligence and rashness. He 
alleges necromancy as a proof of the immortality of the 
soul. He declares the demons succeeded in exorcising in 
the name of the God of Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob. 
These, and other absurdities, are abundantly proved by 
extracts and references in Middleton's Free Enquiry, (vide 
index,) and in Barbeyrac, sur la Morale des Peres, chap- 
ter 2. Is such a man authority for any thing? But nei- 
ther are the gospels cited by Justin Martyr. 

[Worse and worse. What ! was Justin Martyr igno- 
rant of the gospels? He certainly would have quoted 
them instead of the Sybilline books, or, at least, as well 
as the Sybilline books, if he had known any thing about 
them. But no — he makes no mention of them.] 



120 LECTURE V. 

Iren^us, a worthy disciple of that acknowledged idiot 
Papias, 1 Jortin Rem. Ecc. Hist, page 310, a still more 
diligent collector of apostolic traditions. 

On that authority, in direct contradiction to gospel fact, 
and acknowledged dates, he asserts that our Saviour was 
at least fifty years old when he was crucified ; that all the 
old men who lived in apostolic times coincided in this opi- 
nion ; that St. John related it to them. Yet St. John's 
gospel, which he could never have seen, makes Jesus but 
thirty-one years old at the crucifixion. Whitby and Cave 
do well to exclaim at this flagrant mistake, if you choose 
so to call it. 

Iren^eus wrote five books against heresies, and some 
fragments to be found quoted by Eusebius and others. Ex- 
cept these fragments, we have nothing but an old Latin ver- 
sion of Ireneeus. His death is generally placed in 202 ; the 
time of his writings is variously placed from 178 to 192 ; 
the mean between the two calculations will probably be 
right. See 2 Lard. Credib. 154, 155. 

Irenseus mentions the evangelists by name as the au- 
thors of the gospels usually ascribed to them. He is the 
first writer, christian or pagan, who does so. The first 
clear and distinct notice of the existence of these gospels, 
supposed to have been written by the apostles themselves, 
is 185 years after Christ. About this time there existed 
a multitude of other gospels of nearly similar import 
with those we now possess ; varying in the facts related, 
and the conversations and sayings detailed, but whose 
evidence of authenticity had never been examined. Many 
christians, far superior in understanding, talents, and 
learning to Irenaeus, rejected those he has adopted, and 
received others: but upon what grounds some were re- 
ceived and others rejected, it is impossible now to ascer- 
tain ; nor was any attempt made to settle this important 



THE ANCIEKT FATHERS. 121 

question, and to ascertain the true from the false, at any 
time that I know of, previous to the decision at the council 
of Nice. For, although Melito, Origen, Jerom, had form- 
ed their own selections, the grounds of choice, the histori- 
cal and intrinsic motives of adoption or rejection, are no 
where detailed in such a manner that we can now judge 
of their relevancy. Irenaeus seems to have adopted the 
general, popular, and prevailing opinion, without much 
scrutiny on the subject. We suppose so, because he was 
too ignorant and silly to exercise any judicious discrimina- 
tion on the subject. For instance, 

He relates that the millennium would certainly occur ; 
and this from the accounts of old men who had heard St. 
John give an account of it from our Saviour's relation. 
During this millennium vineyards shall have 10,000 vines, 
each vine 10,000 branches, each branch 10,000 shoots, 
each shoot 10,000 bunches, each bunch 10.000 grapes, and 
each branch shall yield 25 measures of wine. So of 
wheat, each grain shall produce 10,000 stalks, each stalk 
10,000 grains, each grain 10,000 lb. of the finest flour ; 
and so of all fruits, seeds, &c. in proportion. For all this 
he cites Papias, a disciple of St. John, and companion to 
Polycarp ; and he confirms it by the testimonies of Isaiah, 
Ezekiel, Jeremiah, Daniel, and the revelations of St. John.* 
Irenaeus affirms also that Enoch and Elias were translated 
into the same paradise that Adam was expelled from. He 
defends the divine authority of the Septuagint. He says 
(wherein he is followed by all the principal fathers of the 

* Chillingsworth, speaking of Papias, observes, that if Papias, who first 
committed to writing the doctrines of the millennium, of angels, demons, 
&c. could either by his own error, or by a desire to deceive others, cozen the 
fathers of his day in these, why not in other things ? Why not in twenty 
as well as in one ? And why might not twenty others do it as well as he ? 
See Chillingsworth' s additional discourse, page 36, 37, at the end of the 
seventh edition of his works. 

11 



122 LECTURE V. 

succeeding centuries) that the sacred scriptures were utterly 
destroyed at the Babylonish captivity, but restored again 
by Esdras after 70 years. Indeed, Esdras (2 Esd. chap- 
ter 40) says the same thing. I see nothing impossible in 
this, though all modern divines are greatly scandalized at 
it He intimates more than once the intermixture of the 
angels of God with the daughters of men, an opinion that 
maintained its ground through the four first centuries. 
(Whitby, Strict. Patr. Gen. in chapter vi, verse 4, page 5.) 
For these and many more at least equal absurdities, see 
Middleton's Free Enquiry, and Barbeyrac sur la morale 
des peres, page 19, et saq. Books that no honest and im- 
partial reader can peruse, without full conviction that my 
representations do not exceed the reality ; and that men so 
childish and silly were incapable of any just and critical 
discrimination; and their suffrages therefore are utterly 
worthless. 

I have strong doubts about the testimony of Irenseus. 
For, 1st, except some Greek fragments preserved by Euse- 
bius, in which Irenseus cites, or is made to cite the evan- 
gelists by name, we have little else but a Latin transla- 
tion of his works, of whose date we know nothing. Of 
Eusebius we may say, in the language of modern excla- 
mation, " Ferdinand Moses Mendez de Pinto, was but a 
type of thee, thou liar of the first magnitude !" 2. By 
the contemporary writers, enumerated by Lardner in vol. 
2 of his Credib. Athenagoras, 178. Miltiader, 130. Theo- 
philus, 181. (except one passage relating to the Logos) 
Hantcenus, 192. Polycrates, 196. Heraclitus, 196. Her- 
mias, 200. Serapion, 200, contain, indeed a few citations 
similar to passages contained also in the Evangelists, but 
no distinct and positive reference to them, nor any quota- 
tion of them by name. 

[Here are no less than eight different writers, all con- 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 123 

temporary with Ireneeus, and not one of them quotes the 
gospels by name. Of course they do not give the four 
selected by Irenaeus such a decided preference as he does. 
Neither is it known why these were preferred to others.] 

Athenagoras, in his apology, says we do not deny but 
in different places, cities, and counties, extraordinary works 
are performed in the names of idols, from which some 
have received benefit, others injury. Apol. page 25. 
Origen admits to the same purpose, Contr. Cels. lib. 3, 
page 124. Athenagoras says of the prophets, that while 
under divine impulse, they are in ecstacy, and delivered 
their inspiration as a pipe or flute delivers a sound as 
communicated to it. Legat. pro. Christ, page 9 edit ad. 
calcem. Justin Martyr Op. In this opinion he is followed 
by Justin Martyr and Tertullian. Mid. Free Enquir. 111. 
He was of opinion, like most of the fathers, that the af- 
fairs of this world were committed to the government of 
angels. He regarded second marriages as adulterous ; a 
very common opinion among the ancient fathers.* 

Clemens Alexandrinus. — This father, so far from 
agreeing with Irenaeus as to the age of Jesus Christ, af- 
firms, as the latter fathers generally do, that he preached 
but one year, and died, (Stromat. 1. page 407, edit. Oxon. 
Tertullian adv. Jud. page 215. Midd. Free Enq. 56) 
whereas, from our present gospels it is evident that his 
ministry continued through several successive passovers ; 
and according to Sir Isaac Newton's computation, (Obs. 
on Dan. chapter Jl, page 159) he died in his 34th year. 
Yet Clement testifies of himself that he had received his 
doctrines from several disciples of the chief apostles, who 
had truly preserved the tradition of the blessed doctrine, 

* See Barbeyr. ub. sup. chapter 4, who enumerates and produces proofs 
from Chrysostom, Theophilus of Antioch, Clemens Alexand. Tertullian 
Minucius, Felix, Origen, St. Basil, Gregory of Nazianzen, and Jerom. 



124 LECTURE V. 

as it came directly from the holy apostles, Peter, James, 
and John. But he deals largely in the books prevalent at 
the time, and now known to be apocryphal and forged. 
Like Irenseus, Tertullian, Cyprian, and many more, he is 
fully persuaded of the power of magical incantations, and 
the power of magicians over demons. Indeed, in those 
days, what the heathens were supposed to perform by 
magic, the christians were supposed to perform by means 
of gifts divinely bestowed on them. Among the gifts thus 
supernaturally imparted and exercised in Justin Martyr's 
time, he reckons healing the sick, casting out evil spirits, 
&c. 1 Jortin's Rem. 307. Clement is also persuaded that 
the worship of the celestial bodies was ordained by God, 
as a gradual means of leading the heathen to the know- 
ledge of the true God. For the references in truth of all 
this, and for a copious analysis of the three books of this 
pedagogue, I must send the reader to Barbeyrac's chapter 
on this father, in his treatise so often cited, sur la morale 
des Peres ; and which will supply abundant proofs of the 
ignorance and imbecility with which Clement treats ethical 
questions. 

Tertullian, says Dr. Jortin, had no small share of 
credulity. He proves that the soul is corporeal though 
immortal, from the visions of an illuminated sister who 
had seen a soul. De anima, page 311. He affirms round- 
ly (constat, says he, ethnibus quoque testibus) that a fine 
city was seen for forty days suspended over Jerusalem ; 
this he considers as a proof that the millennium is at 
hand ; Cont. Marc, hi, page 24. St. John is supposed to 
have been banished by Domitian, A. D. 94. Not a likely 
stoty at that age. Tertullian (and others after him, on 
his credit) says that John was put into a vessel of boiling 
oil ! This story St. Jerom also repeats with embellish- 
ments of his own. St. John must probably at this time 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 125 

have been near 130 years old, for Jesus Christ would have 
been 128 at that time. See Leclerc's Hist. Eccles. page 
508. The apostle came out unhurt, says Tertullian! He 
came out stronger and healthier than he went in, says St. 
Jerom ! Jortin observes that Jerom might have in his 
thoughts, Eson coming out of Medea's kettle, from 7 Ovid. 
Metam. 288. To believe all Tertullian's falsehoods, it is 
necessary to adopt his maxim, Credo quia impossibile est, 
and that the true disciples of Christ have no business 
with curiosity or enquiry, their duty being to believe. Cum 
credimaS) nihil desideramus ultra credere. De proescr. 
hcer. § 8.* 

I omit, on account of their number and their length, all 
the falsehoods and the follies of this pious father, which 
Middleton and Barbeyrac have collected. If he could 
have been defended or excused, Jortin, who was very or- 
thodox, very ingenious, very learned, and full of good 
taste, would have defended or excused him. To Middle- 
ton and Barbeyrac I refer the reader. 

Origen. He denounces second marriages as exclu- 
ding the parties from the kingdom of God ; but as the 
example of Abraham stood in his way, he says that all 
the history of that patriarch is to be understood not literally 
but allegorically. 

He declares, (see Middleton, index sub voce Origen, as 
a general reference,) that the Christians of his days could 
drive away devils, perform cures, and foresee things to 
come. That the driving away of devils was generally 

* Tertullian, who lived about A. D. 200, says, " Why am I not ashamed 
of maintaining that the Son of God was born ? Why ! but because it is 
itself a shameful thing. I maintain that the Son of God died ; well, that 
is wholly credible, because it is monstrously absurd. I maintain that, after 
having been buried, he arose again : and that I take to be absolutely true, 
because it was manifestly impossible !" De Spectaculis, c. 30. Diegesis, 
p. 326. 

11* 



126 LECTURE V. 

performed by laymen. He allows that there was a demon 
called EsculaphiSj very skilful in medicine.* He says, 
that the Jews cast out devils by the name of the God of 
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob ; these devils were accustomed 
to destroy cattle.t He cites as genuine, the spurious book, 
entitled, " the Preaching of Peter." He denies the charge 
of Celsus, that the christians interpolated the verses of 
the Sybil ; a denial that involves, on his side, beyond all 
doubt, a wilful falsehood ; see 1 Jortio 182 and 188 — 217. 
Justin Martyr also cites the Sybilline verses as genuine in 
his Cohortafcio ad Groecos. Jortin suspects this tract to 
be spurious, and it would be well for Justin Martyr's cha- 
racter if it were proved so. 

Cyprian, or St. Cyprian, as he is generally called, an 

* Mr. Addison'* versification of the prophecies which foretold the life 
and actions of iEsculapius, from the Metamorphoses of Ovid, may compare 
very well with Pope's Messiah. 

Once, as the sacred infant she surveyed, 

The god was kindled in the raving maid ; 

And thus she uttered her prophetic tale, 

" Hail, great Physician of the world ! all hail, 

Hail, mighty infant, who in years to come, 

Shall heal the nations, and defraud the tomb ! 

Swift be thy growth, thy triumphs unconfined, 

Make kingdoms thicker, and increase mankind. 

Thy daring art shall animate the dead, 

And draw the thunder on thy guilty head ; 

Then shalt thou die, but from the dark abode 

Shalt rise victorious, and be twice a god." 

Taylor's Diegesis, p. 148. 
t "Origen, in his answer to Celsus, ch. 6. says, "Then Celsus says, 
that all the power which the christians had, was owing to the names of 
certain demons, and their invocation of them. But this is a most notorious 
calumny. For the power which the christians had was not in the least 
owing to enchantments, but to their pronouncing the name J E S U Si 
and making mention of some remarkable occurrences of his life. Nay, 
the name of J E S U S has such power over demon*, that sometimes it 
has proved effectual, though pronounced by very wicked persons." Tay- 
lor's Diegesis, p. 335. 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 127 

African bishop, full of high notions of clerical dominion ; 
remarkable for a style even more inflated than that of Ter- 
tullian, whom he imitates. This godly man put away his 
wife on turning christian, that he might not be contami- 
nated with the sensual enjoyments of this world. For a 
man in full health and vigor to do this, (says his biogra- 
pher Pontius,) and to live a life of continence, is truly a 
signal miracle !* Cyprian had a curious method of carry- 
ing on his business and his church government. Did he 
U6e wine a little too freely at the Eucharist? He was 
favored with a vision ordering him to mix water with it. 
Had he to threaten some priest for being too lenient ? He 
has a vision in which he is told how to punish them. 
Does he wish to reclaim one priest, or appoint another ? 
He has divine communications expressly to the purpose. 

I fancy the reader (if his good sense be not overwhelm- 
ed by orthodoxy) will agree with me, that this lying saint 
was an egregious sinner, however fashionable his conduct 
might be among the pious and venerable fathere of the 
christian church. His visions usually took place when 
he had any point of episcopal authority to carry with the 
previous consent of his clergy and people : it is useless to 
debate, says he : we have no need of human suffrage, 
when we are preceded by divine admonitions. Ep. 33. 
In a time of persecution Cyprian fled, and pleaded an ex- 
press revelation for so doing. Yet he exhorts strenuously 
to martyrdom ; although he complains that many who 
had been persecuted for religion's sake, had, by their con- 
duct, disgraced their profession. I have not room for many 
of his wonderful stories, (inventions,) from his magnificent 
treatise on the lapsed Christians. I refer to Middleton's 

* [I should suppose it would depend, in some measure, how well he liked 
his wife.] 



128 LECTURE V. 

Free Enquiry, 112 et seq. to 2 Jortin's Rem. on Ecc, 
Hist. 76, 77, where the reader will find abundance to dis- 
gust him with the conduct, pretensions, declarations, and 
professions of this dexterous seer of visions, and dreamer 
of dreams. For his fraudulent application of scripture 
passages, and his fraudulent interpolations, I refer to Bar- 
beyrac. 

Lactantius asserts, that the christians of his day 
could exorcise possessed persons, and drive away demons. 
He maintained the genuineness of the Sybilline oracles. 
He urges necromancy as a proof of the immortality of 
the soul. He argues against the right of self-defence, and 
the resistance of injuries ; against the use of arms. 
Against the right to accuse any one of a capital crime. 
He exclaims also against foreign commerce; against 
taking interest for money. See Barbeyrac and Middleton. 

Athanasius was one of the first who introduced 
monks into Italy.. He wrote a life of the monk St. An- 
thony, and says, in the preface, that he had inserted no- 
thing therein that he did not know to be true, having seen 
the saint himself, or having heard it from one who had 
long ministered to him, and poured water on his hands. 
For the character of this book of lies, I refer to Middle- 
ton's Free Enq. 147, and to 2 Jortin's Rem. 85, who have 
given specimens of the figments of this impudent prede- 
cessor of Baron Munchausen. 

Gregory of Nyssa published a life of Gregory Thau- 
maturgus, or the wonder worker, after the model of Atha- 
nasius's life of St. Anthony.* 

* St. Gregory Thaumaturgus, A. D. 243, " being yet a layman, be 
wrought many miracles, he cured the sick, chased away devils by his epis- 
tles, and converted the Gentile* and Ethnics unto the faith, not only with 
words, but by deeds of far greater force." Socrates Scholast. lib. 4. c. 22- 
Diegesis, p. 343. 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 129 

But I am weary of a continual reference to the works 
that expose this mass of folly and fraud ; where some- 
times the one predominates, sometimes the other ; and 
which I regret to say characterizes so peculiarly the chris- 
tian authors of the times nearest to the purest period of 
the christian church, if, indeed, such a period can really 
be found. I shall, therefore, now confine myself to Euse- 
bius, Jerom, and St. Austin, or Augustine ; and when I 
have done with these, the reader will have before him 
some faithful characteristic traits by which he may judge 
of the characters of the writings and the writers, whose 
evidence alone is the basis on which the authenticity of 
our New Testament rests. 

Eusebius is the principal author for ecclesiastical his- 
tory, one of the most zealous of the christian fathers, and 
the writer on whom christian divines generally rely. 
Jones and Lardner do not seem to entertain a doubt of 
any thing that Eusebius asserts. Indeed, with all his 
learning, his indefatigable industry, his honest zeal, and 
his good intentions, I know not a more credulous critic 
than Lardner. His christian prejudices blind him in 
every page, and it seems, it is likely, it is probable, we 
may conclude, no doubt, it is reasonable to suppose, 
and similar expressions, stand incessantly in the place of 
fact and argument, when these are not at hand. 

To Eusebius we are obliged for the first regular defence 
and recommendation of saint worship. 2 Jortin Rem. 
157 — 160. To Eusebius w^e are indebted for the inter- 
polated passage in Josephus ; for the forged correspon- 
dence between Jesus Christ and Abgarus of Edessa ; for 
the christian legion of Apollinaris ; and, as I suspect, for 
many other forgeries. I will not dwell on the many won- 
derful and miraculous stories he relates, (see Middl. Free 



130 



LECTURE V. 



Enq. 127, et seq.) but come to the point at once — he was a 
forger on principle, and by profession. 

He acknowledges that he purposely concealed the dis- 
sentions and wickedness of the christians and martyrs : 
nay, he goes so far (Prcep. Evang. lib. 1, page 11,) as to 
assert, that since the coming of Christ there have been no 
wars, or tyrants, or cannibals, or sodomites, or persons com- 
mitting incest, or savages destroying their parents, &c. 
The title of chapter 2 of book 12, of his evangelical pre- 
paration, is, " how it may be proper to use falsehood 
as a medicine, and for the benefit of those who require 
to be deceived" He defends this by the example of 
Plato, and the writers of the Old Testament. See Gib- 
bon's Misc. Works, p. 618. I make no remark on this for 
the present ; but I proceed to his worthy imitator, St. Hie- 
rony mus — Jerom. * 

* Eusebius lived in the days of Constantine, to whom Christianity owes 
its legal establishment. It may be well, therefore, to know something of the 
character of this emperor. " There is abundant proof that he drowned 
his unoffending wife, Fausta, in a bath of boiling water ; beheaded his 
eldest son, Crispus, in the very year in which he presided in the Council of 
Nice, murdered the two husbands of his sisters Constantia, and Anastasia ; 
murdered his own father-in-law, Maximian Herculius ; murdered his own 
nephew, being his sister Constantia's son, a boy only 12 years old, and 
murdered a few others ! which actions, Dr. Lardner, with truly christain 
moderation, tells us, ' seem to cast a reflection upon him. 1 Among the few 
others, never be it forgotten, was Sopater, the pagan priest, who fell a vic- 
tim and a martyr to the sincerity of his attachment to paganism, and to the 
honesty of his refusing the consolations of heathenism to the conscience 
of the royal murderer." Diegesis, p. 348. 

" Constantine, the puissant, the mighty and noble emperor, unto the 
bishops, pastors, and people wheresoever. 

" Moreover, we thought good that if there can be found extant any work 
or book compiled by Arius, the same should be burned to ashes, so that not 
only his damnable doctrine may thereby be wholly rooted out ; but also that 
no relic thereof may remain to posterity. This also, &c. for so doing, 
shall die the death. For as soon as he is taken, our pleasure is, that his 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 131 

Jerom was a zealous admirer and promoter of the monk- 
ish life, and for the sake of advancing its credit in the 
world, he wrote the lives of two celebrated monks, St 
Paul and St. Hilarion ; in which, after having invoked 
the same holy spirit which inspired these monks, to inspire 
him also with language equal to the wondrous acts he was 
about to relate, he has inserted a number of tales and mi- 
racles so grossly fabulous as not to admit the least doubt 
of their being absolute forgeries. The life of Paul was pub- 
lished first ; and, as we learn from Jerom himself, (in the 
preface to the life of Hilarion,) was treated as a mere fable 
by the free-thinkers, or Scyllsean dogs, as he calls them, 
of those days. 

Nor is it considered at this day in any other character, 
or mentioned by the learned for any other reason, than as 
a proof of that passion for fiction and imposture, which 
(as Dodwell says in his dissertation on Ireneeus) possessed 
and actuated the fathers of the fourth century. See Midi 
Free Enq. postscript cxxx. Dodwell is far from being alone 
in that remark, as I have already shown. Mosbeim. in 
his Ecc. Hist. Cent. iv. part 2, chapter 3, states, it is a 
maxim adopted among the fathers of the church, that it 
is an act of virtue to deceive and lie for the interests of 
the church. Bishop Heliodorus, in his romance of The- 
agnes and Chariclea iEthiop. lib. 1, insinuates the same 
maxim. " For a falsehood is a good thing when it 
aids the speaker and does no injury to the hearer" 



head be striken off from his shoulders. God keep you in tuition." Socrates 
Scholasticus, vol. 1. c. 6. fol. p. 227. Diegesis, p. 350. 

" Having, by God's assistance, gotten the victory over mine enemies, I 
entreat you therefore, beloved ministers of God, and servants of our Lord 
and Saviour Jesus Christ, to cut off the heads of this hydra of heresy, for 
so shall you please both God and Tra." Euseb. Vita. Const, lib. 3. c. 12. lb. 
p. 351. 



132 LECTURE V. 

Let us, however, proceed to Jerom's deliberate defence 
of this practice. " In like manner, O most learned men, 
we have learned in the schools those maxims of Aristotle 
deduced from the precepts of Gorgias, that there are seve- 
ral methods of discussion ; and, among others, one mode 
of writing is gymnastically^ another dogmatically. In 
the first, the disputation is vague ; and, in replying to your 
adversary, }~ou sometimes say one thing, sometimes ano- 
ther. You use arguments without restraint, you say 
one thing, end you think another ; you show him bread, 
and you conceal a stone. In the other kind of disputa- 
tion you must bear an open front and be ingenuous." After 
alleging to this purpose the examples of the Greek and 
Roman orators and philosophers, St. Jerom goes on to the 
apologists of Christianity. " Origen, Methodius, Euse- 
bius, Apollinaris, have written much against Celsus and 
Porphyry. Consider the nature of the arguments they 
use, and what slippery problems they employ to overturn 
the inventions of the devil. How they are compelled, in 
replying to the pagans, to urge, not what they believe 
themselves, but what is necessary to their cause. I do 
not here instance the Latin fathers, Tertullian, Cyprian, 
Minucius, Victorinus, Lactantius, Hilarius, lest I should 
be suspected rather of blaming their practices, than de- 
fending my own. But I will produce the example of the 
apostle Paul, whom I never peruse without thinking that 
I hear his thunderings rather than read his words. Con- 
sult his epistles, particularly to the Romans, Galatians, 
and Ephesians, where he disputes continually. You will 
see, in the proofs he borrows from the Old Testament, with 
what address, what dissimulation he manages his sub- 
ject. He deals in words that seem so simple, that you 
would rather say that it was some ignorant countryman 
who used them, some innocent person equally unskilled 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 133 

to lay a snare or to avoid one ; but on whatever side you 
turn your eyes, you see nothing but thunderbolts. He 
seems embarrassed how to defend his cause ; he seizes 
every thing that falls in his way. He turns his back that 
he may conquer ; he makes semblance of flight to worry 
his antagonist. Let us charge this upon him as a crime, 
and say to him, the testimonies you have used against 
the Jews and other heretics, have one signification in 
their original place, and another in your writings. 
We see here examples forcibly pressed into the service, 
which aid you in gaining a victory, but have no force 
in the books from whence you take them. Would not 
the apostle address us like our Saviour ? We speak one 
thing abroad, another at home. The crowd hear our pa- 
rables ; the disciples our truth. Our Saviour proposes 
questions to the Pharisees, but he resolves none. It is one 
thing to teach a disciple, another to confute an adversary." 

Such is the reasoning of Jerom.* We find, that in 
using these artifices, he only followed the practices of the 
fathers who preceded him. In another passage of the 
same apology, he says, " it is a pretty thing, indeed, to 
advise me to strike so as to give an advantage to my 
enemy. To tell me I must conquer by main force, and 
not by stratagem. Is not the great art of fighting, to me- 
nace one place, and to strike another?" 

He mentions a silly story of the christians at Jerusalem, 
who used to show, in the ruins of the temple, certain 
stones of a reddish color, which they pretended to have 
been stained by the blood of Zacharias, the son of Bara- 
chias, who was slain between the temple and the altar, 
" I do not find fault (says he) with an error which pro- 

* In his Apolog. pro. lib. adv. Jovin. to which wc may add Epist. 89. ad 
Pommach. 

12 



134 LECTURE V. 

ceeds from a*hatred toward the Jews, and a pious zeal for 
the christian faith." Oper. torn. 4, page 113. 

It is unnecessary to multiply proofs against these saints. 
Their principles and practices are well calculated to tempt 
all honest men to conclude, that the spirit of Christianity, 
as it was known, received, taught, and exemplified in the 
earliest ages of its history, from the close of the first to the 
close of the fourth century, was strongly connected with 
ignorance, credulity, superstition, fraud, forgery, and im- 
posture. Nor have these marks and characters of the spi- 
rit of Christianity been entirely omitted in modern times. 
Witness the Episcopalian forgeries and mistranslations ; the 
pious stories of the priests of the Romish church ; and the 
inveterate bigotry and intolerance that has always charac- 
terized the devoted followers of St. Dominic and John 
Calvin. 

[It will be recollected by some of my audience, what a 
hue and cry there was made, because I stated, in the 
Prince-street church, that the New Testament writers 
sometimes quoted the Old Testament scriptures by way of 
accommodation. But what would have been said if I 
had charged Paul with using " dissimulation? as Jerom 
has done ? Yea, more ; Jerom quoted Paul as an exam- 
ple to justify his own practice in the same art ! That 
Paul was guilty of all that I charged him with, there can 
be no doubt by any one who will examine the subject ; 
but I never supposed him so guilty as Jerom has represent- 
ed him ; neither do I now think him so verily guilty. 
But a guilty man always looks for precedents to cover his 
own crimes. It was probably so with Jerom.] 



LECTURE VI. 



ACCOUNT OF THE ANCIENT FATHERS CONTINUED. 
" Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thes. v. 21. 

Augustin. Saint Augustin, Saint Austin, Bishop of 
Hippo, in Africa. I omit the notorious falsehoods and 
absurdities detailed as true by this famous saint, on the 
subjects of monks, monkery, and miracles. I shall notice 
only the accusations of which Barbeyrac has so well fur- 
nished the proofs. 

[As in the life of Origen, so here, in the life of St. Aus- 
tin, I omit some things, which delicacy forbids that I 
should publicly repeat ; but, if any are curious to make 
themselves acquainted with all the pious notions of the 
ancient christian fathers, I would refer them to the Corres- 
pondent, where they will find a more circumstantial ac- 
count ; and should any one examine fully into this mat- 
ter, possessing the religious feelings of modern christians, 
I would ask him how he will reconcile the liberal recom- 
mendations of St. Austin, (the loaning of wives, &c.) 
with his present orthodox notions.] 

He declares (ib. 290 et seq.) that all the goods and pos- 
sessions of the wicked, do not really belong to the ostensi- 
ble owners and possessors, but to the saints, the righteous, 
the church of God. He is the first and chief defender of 
persecution for the sake of religion ; the propounder of 



136 LECTURE VI. 

those tenets, on which the holy inquisition has all along 
proceeded ; and of that pious hatred against heterodoxy, 
which leads to the extermination of those who are ob- 
noxious to that dreadful charge. The persecution of the 
reformed in France, is justified on the authority of St. 
Austin, whose 93d Epist. to Vincent, and 185th to Boni- 
face, were translated and republished in defence of that 
measure. I forget whether that protestant St. Dominic, 
John Calvin, cites him; but they were a congenial pair. 

This grand patriarch of persecution seems to have 
adopted and embraced with all the ardor of conviction, 
the following mild and benign precept of the Jewish law- 
giver, 13 Dent. 6 — 10. " If thy brother, the son of thy 
mother — or thy son — or thy daughter — or the wife of thy 
bosom — or the friend which is as thy own soul — entice 
thee secretly, saying, let us go and serve other Gods 
which thou hast not known, thou nor thy fathers, namely 
the Gods of the people which are around about thee, nigh 
unto thee, or far off from thee, from the one end to the 
other, even the other end of the earth — then shalt thou 
not consent unto him, nor hearken unto him, neither shall 
thine eye pity him, nor shalt thou spare, neither shalt thou 
conceal him; but thou shalt surely kill him; thine hand 
shall be first on him to put him to death, and afterwards 
the hand of all the people : and thou shalt stone him with 
stones till he die ; because he has sought to thrust thee 
away from the Lord thy God, which brought thee out of 
the land of Egypt, and out of the house of bondage." 
Surely, if the Almighty, so impartial, chose to harden the 
heart of Pharaoh, he has chosen also to harden the hearts 
of his chosen people, Jewish and christian ! In what other 
language the devil could express his crudest wishes, I am 
at a loss to conjecture. 

By idolatry is meant the horrible crime of ceasing to 



THE ANCIENT FATHERS. 137 

be the dupes of one set of priests, and becoming the dupes 
of another. Doubtless, burning, crucifying, impaling, and 
torturing, are chastisements too mild for an offence so 
abominable ! Yet there are christians, such as our caivinis- 
tic presbyterian clergy, who are not ashamed to declare 
the Pentateuch, and this passage among the rest of it, to 
be a book dictated and delivered by divine inspiration ! 

St. Augustin, not satisfied with the slowness of proceed- 
ing of the council of Carthage, in 408, who had deter- 
mined to write to Honorius on the suppression of the 
Donatists, wrote himself to Olympius, the favorite of the 
emperor, and procured the passage of that law against the 
Donatists, which subjects them to the punishment of death. 
Codex Theodos. lib. 16. tit. De Hcereticis, leg. 44. It i» 
true, he pretends to be adverse to putting them to death ; 
but any punishment short of that falls within the due cor- 
rection, which he wishes to be applied. As to the Pagans, 
however, he approves highly of the capital punishment to 
which they were condemned for exercising the religion of 
their ancestors.* 

And here I will close my sketch of a set of writers con- 
cerning whom it may be truly eaid, that it is difficult to 
determine whether folly or knavery were most predomi- 
nant among them. Writers worthy of no credit, cither for 
their critical acumen, their sound judgment, or their vera- 
city ; qualities which, however necessary to the establish- 
ment of the cause they would wish to support, they have 
no real pretentions to. It is melancholy to think, that 



* See the proofs set forth by BarbeyTac in his traite de la morale des peies, 
quarto, 305—307, and also from 193 to 200, to which I have to add that I 
have myself verified these references in the same edition of St. Augustin's 
works, in 10 volumes fol. ed. Paris, 1G96, by the Benedictines of St. Maur. 
The chief passage relating to the persecution of the Donatists referred to 
by Barbeyrac, is in !he life of St. Augustin, lib. t>, chapter 6, page 297. 

12* 



138 LECTURE VI. 

modern Christianity should depend on the writings of this 
dishonest class of men, who in addition to their own for- 
geries and deceptive statements, procured the destruction 
by law (2 and 3 Jortin's Rem. page 205) of the books of 
all their opponents, whether called pagans or heretics. It 
is melancholy to think, that the evidence of the genuine- 
ness of the christian gospels, should depend exclusively 
upon citations, and extracts of men, who cite indiscrimi- 
nately books undoubtedly forged, and books suspiciously 
genuine. Men, who had no sense or learning to discrimi- 
nate — no knowledge of the canons of historical evidence 
sufficient to preserve them from being deceived them- 
selves—and no honesty to induce them to refrain from de- 
ceiving others, by citing what they knew to be forged, and 
many of them by forging themselves when it appeared 
conducive to die cause they had to support. A class of 
writers who sprang up with Christianity, and whose fraudu- 
lent propensities have been but too successfully propagated 
from their davs to ours.* 



♦ That vrt may understand the general feeling of priests respecting the 
7£st of mankind, whom they usually denominate the people, let us hear 
one of the doctors of the church. "The people, says Syncsius, bishop of 
Pto!emais v , early in the fifth century, (in Calv. page 315) are desirous of 
being deceived : we cannot act otherwise respecting them. Such was the 
case with, the ancient priests of Egypt ; and for this reason they shut them- 
selves up in their temples, and there composed their mysteries out of 
the reach of the people's eye ; (forgetting what he had just before said, he 
«dd») for had the pf ople been in the secret, they might have been offended 
al the deception played upon them. In the mean time, how is it possible 
to conduct one's self otherwise with the people, so long as they are the 
people? For my own part, to myself I shall always be a philosopher, but 
in dealing with the mass of mankind, I shall be a priest. 

" A little jargon, says Gregory of Nazianzen to St. Jerom, (Hieron/?n. ad 
Nep.) is all that is r*tce*sary to impose upon the people. The leas they 
comprehend, the more they admire. Our forefathers and doctors of the 
church have often said, not what they thought, but what circumstance* atid 
necessity dictated to them. 



THE ANCIENT FATHEHS. 139 

The first complete list of christian forgeries was pub- 
lished by Toland, in his Amyntor, and more perfect in the 
first volume of his miscellaneous works ; and which has 
now fully stood the test of criticism. Then Jeremiah 
Jones published also a good catalogue in his new method 
of settling the canon of Scripture, vol. 2, page 119 : this 
has been republished at the end of Hone's Collection of 
the Apocryphal Gospels. Readers in general are content 
to pin their faith on authority, and do not recur to these 
learned works of laborious research ; otherwise I do not 
see how any cause could have survived such a dreadful 
accumulation of forgery and fraud. The facilities afford- 
ed to forgery and interpolation, when all books were 
manuscripts, were far greater than in the present day. 

In giving the preceding account, I have for the most 
part taken my authorities at second hand, from Dodwell, 
Middleton, Lardner, Jones, Daillie, Joitin, Mosheim, Bar- 
beyrac, Priestley, Horsley : moderns of distinguished cha- 
racter, well settled in reputation, and unimpeachable ; all 
of them christians by profession ; and to whose fairness, 
as well as learning, there neither is, or can be, any objec- 
tion. Where 3r:y second-hand authority is not cited, I 
rely on originals as I have quoted them : very many of 
my second hand authorities, where I thought there could 
be doubt, I have verified laboriously : and / profess my- 
self ready to authenticate every original citation that 
may be really disyuted. because I possess the means 
of doing so : ani if I do not ill every case cite the origi- 

" We endeavour, says Sanconiathon, (in Euseb. prcep. Evang. lib. 3.) to 
excite admiration by means of the marvellous." 

Bishop Syenesius, Jerom, Gregory of Nazianzen, Eusebius, are among 
the most illustrious fathers of the church ; and dreadful rogues they seem 
to have been ! Yet, how much has the christian world assumed as true, on 
the authority of these men ! It is high ttxne to adopt some common sense 
system of historical criticism. 



140 LECTURE VI. 

nal authorities, it is because few persons in the United 
States are in possession of the books necessary to follow 
me. I refer, therefore, for the most part, to authors easy 
to be procured ; authors, that every man of tolerable learn- 
ing possesses ; authors, that no clerical library ought to 
want : and authors absolutely unimpeachable. 

I proceed with my next object of enquiry. 

What reason have we to prefer the authenticity of 
the present gospels over contemporary and acknowledg- 
ed forgeries ? 

I know of none, but the gradual selection made by 
Melito, Origen, and Jerom. and some other fathers, with- 
out any sufficient discrimination, without any reason but 
popular opinion, without any critical examination into 
their authority, and without any conclusive reason yet 
assigned, for adoption or rejection. 

The following facts are certain: 

The Jews of our Saviour's day, spake the Syriac lan- 
guage, 5 Mark, 41. 7 Mark, 34. 9 Acts, 40. 13 Neh. 23 : 
they quoted from the Hebrew ; as in that passage of the 
psalms. Eli, Eli, lama Sabacthani : He asks for vinegar, 
says a soldier, misunderstanding him : for Hilor Hely is in 
Syriac, vinegar. The Hebrew for vinegar, is hhometz. 
(One jot) 4 Matt. 18. The Syriac jot is smaller than the 
Hebrew. 

If there was any gospel written therefore for the use of 
the Jews, it would have been a Syriac gospel. None euch 
as an original ever existed, so far as we know. We hare 
a Syriac version. Why was a Syriac version necessary ? 
And why were the originals in any other language ? Mat- 
thew is supposed to have written Hebrew ; and the gospel 
of the Ebionites mentioned by Epiphanius and Jerom, is 
said to have been in Hebrew : if so, the common Jews 



THE GOSPELS. 141 

could not understand it , for Hebrew ceased to be spoken 
after the captivity. 13 Neh. 23. 

If Matthew wrote a gospel at ali, where is the evidence 
of it ? I have searched for it in vain : it does not exist. 
The author of St. Matthew's gospel, does not say, " I, 
Matthew, wrote this." I know the supposition, that the 
Ebionite and Nazarene gospel was St. Matthew's : who 
dare assert this is any thing but bare supposition ? As- 
suredly it is not the original of our common Greek ver- 
sion, for it did not contain the two first chapters of our 
present copy. Of this original gospel of St. Matthew no 
known copy ever was seen, by any positive witness to the 
fact. How comes it that all the gospeb are in Greek ? 
The apostles were unlettered, ignorant men, 4 Acts, 15; 
they lived, or are said to have lived, many years in Jeru- 
salem after the death of Christ. Where did they learn 
Greek ? Why did these strict Jews, (for they were so, re- 
proving the time-serving St. Paul because he was not so,) 
why did they write to their own countrymen, in a lan- 
guage which they did not use themselves, and which (Lcir 
own countrymen could not understand? Josephus wrote in 
Syriac for the Jews; and thea !iud his works translated 
into Greek for the benefit of the learned world. 

Who translated Matthew into Greek ? From what origi- 
nal? When did this happgii? Can a book be regarded as 
authentic whereof we knovr neither the author nor the 
language in which it was written, nor when originally pub- 
lished, nor who translated it, nor when it was translated? 
These are fatal defickneifs in the evidence. Does this 
lame account savor of divine origin? 

Is there the slightest evidence of any christian book, an- 
terior to the destruction of Jerusalem, or till the close of 
the first century ? I have examined for such evidence in 
vain. Conjectures abound, but no positive proof or well 



142 LECTURE VI. 

grounded probability can be pointed out. Indeed, consi- 
dering the dispersion of that people, and the confusion 
they must have been in for at least twenty years after 
that event, it is utterly incredible that any book for the use 
of the Jews, except the narration of that siege, should 
have been thought of. They had something else to do 
than either to compose books or read them. 

None of the evangelists to whom the gospels are 
ascribed, pretend to be the authors of them. None of 
them seem to know any thing of the existence of the rest, 
except that Mark and others seem to have borrowed from 
Matthew, without acknowledgment or reference. 

There is no reference to, or any citation from, any of these 
evangelists by name, or by distinct allusion, as the authors 
of our modern gospels, until Irenaeus, one hundred and 
fifty years after the death of Christ. Upon what grounds 
and reason this silly man ascribes them to the four evan- 
gelists, no where appears. I call him silly, because I have 
proved hiai so. 

These gospels appeared contemporarily with a crowd of 
forgeries now known to be so, but which were considered 
in th.?ir day as equally authentic with our present gospels : 
nor is ilKie any good reason why they should not be so 
considered now. 

Jones and Lardnei* have, with great diligence, collected 
from the ancient fathers, ail the quotations and expressions 
that seem to bear even a remote similarity to sentences 
and expressions in our modern gospels : hence they infer, 
that these sentences and rxpi wseioMj t o collected by them, 
are copied and cited from our modern books, which must 
then have existed. But gospels known to be forged, are 
cited by the ancient writers indiscriminately with those 
supposed to be genuine ; and from whence the passages 
are taken no where appears ; they may as well be from 



THE GOSPELS. 143 

the one class as from the other. All is doubt, conjecture, 
supposition : nothing clear, distinct, and certain. The 
oldest evidence relating to our present gospels, is so inter- 
mingled with the equal pretensions of fraud and forgery, 
that we cannot trace when our present gospels got footing 
among christians. Here is a revelation ; one would rea- 
sonably expect that if it is to come to us at second-hand, 
and if instead of a revelation to us, we are required to be 
content with a story of a revelation to others — we have 
good right to expect that the whole account should be 
void of dispute and difficulty ; but we find nothing but 
doubt and darkness, fraud and forgery, on all sides ; and 
we are left to grope our way out of this chaos of gospels 
as well as we can. In our anxious search after truth, we 
call out, let there be light ! but there is no light ; darkness 
still rests on the face of the deep. Sedet, in c&ternitmqxtG 
sedebit ! 

No pagan writer gives us any aid. We hear of chris- 
tians and Christ as popular rumours, or in a vague and 
general way, from Pliny the younger, Tacitus, and Sue- 
tonius — but nothing certain, nothing particularized; no 
history of the sect ; no authentication of any gospel fact ; 
no mention of any of the books or writings of the chris- 
tians ; no christian writer, numerous as the christian for- 
geries were, is once noticed by the learned pagans of the 
day ; the christians seem to have been confounded with 
the Jews. All the books of the New Testament, although 
if genuine they must be w 7 idely spread in the days of 
Tacitus and Suetonius, are to these classic authors, as if 
they had never existed; which indeed is almost the only 
rational way of accounting for this utter silence and neg- 
lect concerning them. 

Who wrote the gospel of Mark ? Mark does not claim 
it ; the other evangelists do not ascribe it to him. When 



144 LECTURE VI. 

was it written ? Where ? To whom ? What, my christian 
friends ! not an answer to any one of these important 
questions ? 

Who wrote the gospels of Luke and John ? Who were 
these men so called? What evidence is there beyond sup- 
position and conjecture, and that perfectly gratuitous, that 
these were the persons of Christ's own days ? When and 
where were these gospels first published ? Who cites them 
before Ireriaeus? 

I challenge any christian to answer these questions sa- 
tisfactorily, abiding by the common rules of ascertaining 
that a work is really the work of the author to whom it is 
ascribed. I know how many fallacious pages can be 
penned, of declamation grounded on conjecture and pos- 
sibility. I know that no evidence, properly so called, can 
be adduced in support of these books, that would not be 
scouted in the most lax and careless court of justice. Of 
direct and positive evidence in support of these books, 
there is none. But is it doubtful evidence that we are to 
expect from divine inspiration ? Is our religious belief to 
depend on the anxious and difficult, and, indeed, impossi- 
ble task, of secerning, by much learned and laborious re- 
search, the forged evidence from the true ? Are these the 
terms and conditions imposed upon every honest enquirer 
into the truth of the Christianity he is required to believe ! 
Of the hundred books either carefully read through, or 
diligently and faithfully consulted by me, on the present 
occasion, the ancient fathers, from Justin Martyr to Au- 
gustia, leaving out the apostolic fathers, consist of thirty 
volumes in folio ; and I can solemnly declare, that I have 
no motive or interest in this enquiry, direct or indirect, but 
to search out the truth for my own guidance, and for the 
sake of others to declare it as I find it. What kind of 
Christianity is that which men take upon trust from their 



THE GOSPELS. 145 

parsons; Episcopalian, Presbyterian, Baptist, Methodist, 
Socinian, Calvinist, Lutheran, Arian, or Trinitarian? From 
parsons, nine tenths of whom, in these United States, ne- 
ver took the trouble of investigating the grounds and 
foundations of their own faith, and who have neither the 
learning, the leisure, nor the library that will enable them 
to do it. A class of men more ignorant of all useful 
knowledge than any other in the community ; a class of 
men more proud, more conceited, more ambitious, more 
money-loving and avaricious, more intolerant, and more 
eaten up by the esprit de corps, than any other know T n 
class, and who have voluntarily disqualified themselves 
from being witnesses in the cause now before us, by re- 
ceiving pay and emolument for preaching and advocating 
one side of it, and abusing as infidels all those who, not 
being interested in the question beyond the common inte- 
rest that truth excites, see reason to adopt the other side. 
Fellow citizens, I appeal to your good sense, who are most 
likely to mislead you : those who, basking in the sunshine 
of popular prejudice, are hired, paid, bribed to take up one 
side of a question, and who live by supporting and defend- 
ing it — or those who come before you unprotected, unpaid, 
unbribed, unhired, and unprostituted ? Judge for your- 
selves as a jury would judge, deciding on the common 
rules of testimony. 

Moreover, how can you expect truth from the lips of 
men whom you hire to foster and defend all your precon- 
ceived opinions on religious subjects ? All the absurd sto- 
ries which you have heard, and all the absurd and intole- 
rant opinions forced upon your pliant understandings, du- 
ring the long period from the nursery to college ? Who, 
if they were to venture, in a fit of honest conviction, to 
avow opinions inconsistent with your prejudices, would be 
rewarded by being turned out to starve ? Is it from such 

13 



146 LECTURE VI. 

men you can expect to hear truth ! No : it is from those 
who do not depend upon your base hire ; who are indiffe- 
rent whether the truth pleases or offends you ; who are wil- 
ling to encounter popular prejudice, and to seek and to 
speak the truth through evil report and through good re- 
port — it is from such persons, who feel their own indepen- 
dence, and who acknowledge no obligation except to what 
is honest, just, and true — it is from such, and such only, 
that you will hear and read what a truth-seeking spirit 
alone can dictate. 

EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY CONCLUDED. 

I have hitherto laid before the reader a brief account and 
character of the evidence on which Christianity actually 
rests. Let us now consider a summary of the rules of 
evidence and testimony adopted in our courts of justice. 

Hearsay is no evidence ; for we have no means of in- 
terrogating the informant, or of judging of his opportuni- 
ties of information, his qualifications, or his character. Of 
course, the hearsay of an hearsay of an hearsay, is abso- 
lutely worthless. 

Witnesses, therefore, who have no personal knowledge 
of the transactions, are inadmissible. Why are not the im- 
mediate witnesses to the fact itself produced ? 

Even if hearsay were admissible, we ought to know 
minutely every thing relating to the informant, that we 
may judge of the value of his account. A narrator, 
therefore, who does not tell his authority for every dubious 
fact, is of no account. 

If the best evidence be not adduced, we ought to be in- 
formed why it is not. 

If hearsay evidence of a recent fact be inadmissible, evi- 



EVIDENCES OP CHRISTIANITY. 147 

dence of a fact that happened a century ago, now offered 
for the first time, is not worth a moment's attention. 

Witnesses interested in the event of a contested cause, 
are inadmissible ; for they have a bias on their minds to 
speak as their interest tempts them. 

Hence witnesses who are hired or paid by one party, are 
incompetent. 

So are witnesses who gain their living by supporting a 
particular interest, or one side of a disputed question. 

So are witnesses who belong to a particular party, and 
are liable to be warped by the esprit de corps ; particularly 
in a religious question. 

Witnesses incompetent to judge of a fact from want of 
education and knowledge, are not admissible. The tricks 
of a juggler would be miracles to a country boor who had 
never seen such before. 

Witnesses guilty of habitual falsehood are inadmissi- 
ble ; especially if they deem falsehood allowable in the 
particular case. 

Witnesses who contradict each other, are mutually de- 
structive of each others testimony, if their values be equal. 

If a witness depose to a fact, not noticed by persons pre- 
sent at the time, of equal veracity, and who must have no- 
ticed it had it happened, he is not to be believed if the ne- 
gative testimony be strong and unimpeachable. 

In proportion as any fact is antecedently important, or 
improbable, the stronger, the clearer, the more unimpeach- 
able is the evidence of it required to be. Common evi- 
dence for a common fact; stronger in proportion as the fact 
is uncommon. 

There are such innumerable instances recorded of pre- 
tended miracles, proved by testimony apparently veracious, 
that all evidence adduced for the purpose of proving a mi- 
racle, is, a priori, incredible ; for the uniform course of hu- 



148 LECTURE VI. 

man experience, in all civilized countries, and among all 
men of learning, is in opposition to the competency, or the 
veracity of such evidence. 

Therefore, if such evidence of a miracle be liable to any 
of the objections above stated, it is inadmissible for the pur- 
pose for which it is adduced. 

Let us very briefly run over the Christian facts, bear- 
ing in mind, and carrying whh us the foregoing principles 
of deciding on human testimony, which no man, conver- 
sant with the investigations of disputed facts, will for a 
moment controvert. 

The evidence of the doings and sayings of Jesus 
Christ, are to be found in the four gospels. If these be 
deficient in authenticity, w^e have absolutely no evidence 
whatever ; for christians, by common consent, have re- 
jected every other. I ask, then, 

1. Who are Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John ? They 
are supposed to be the authors of these gospels, but they 
do not say so themselves, and no one says so for them till 
150 years after the supposed death of Christ. 

2. Luke expressly says he was a compiler. Mark is 
supposed to have written what he heard from Peter. Of 
Matthew we know nothing. Of John less. But be they 
who they may be, none of them claim the authorship ; 
none of them declare who wrote the accounts — none of 
them declare they were present at the transactions — none 
of them vouch for the facts as true on their own personal 
knowledge. So far as appears, all is hearsay, traditional 
evidence of facts and sayings, which, to be accurately re- 
lated, could not be told from memory, but must have been 
written down quickly. 

3. Not knowing any how, but by conjecture, the wri- 
ters of these gospels, and being absolutely ignorant when 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 149 

and where they were written, we have no means of judg- 
ing how far they are worthy of credit. 

4. The best evidence is not produced. Why did not 
Christ publish his own doctrines, if they were so important 
to the world, and not leave them to the frail memory of 
any transient narrator — of nobody knows who? Why 
did not these evangelists declare who they were, and how 
they came to write the accounts we possess, and on what 
evidence they offer to the public these narrations ? It is 
not likely that unlearned and ignorant men should thus 
turn authors in a language to which they were unaccus- 
tomed — in a language not understood by, or in use among 
the people they addressed — if they did, why do they not 
say so expressly ? why not tell us how it happened, that, 
being Syriac Jews, they came to learn Greek ? why not 
remove these reasonable doubts ? 

So, of the main fact, the resurrection, the promise and 
the boast was made in public — the execution of Jesus 
Christ as a malefactor was public — the challenge to a re- 
surrection was given in public. The performance, accord- 
ing to every evidence we possess of it, was secret, clandes-^ 
tine, concealed from those for whose conviction it was pro- 
mised — and Jesus Christ, if he ever lived, or died, or rose, 
(all equally doubtful,*) sneaked about after his resurrection 

* Nonexistence of Christ. — " To the question, then," says Mr. Taylor, 
M On what grounds do you deny that such a person as Jesus Christ existed, 
as a man V The proper answer is, " because his existence as a man has, 
from the earliest day on which it can be shown to have been asserted, 
"been as earnestly and strenuously denied, and that, not by enemies of the 
christian name, or unbelievers of the christian faith, but by the most intel- 
ligent, most learned, most sincere of the christian name ; who ever left the 
world proofs of their intelligence and learning in their writings, and of 
their sincerity in their sufferings. 

" And, because the existence of no individual of the human race, that 
was real and positive, was ever, by a like conflict of jarring evidence, ren- 
dered equivocal and uncertain." Diegesis, p. 254. 

13* 



150 LECTURE VI. 

like a thief from the officers of justice — known only among 
the male and female bigots of his own party, and departing 
finally from among a few witnesses whose names and cha- 
racters, with the chief circumstances that must have at- 
tended his departure, are left untold, or told without par- 
ticulars, or in any manner that will allow us to judge of 
the truth of the fact. Why did he not put the question 
to rest by appearing publicly after his resurrection, and by 
causing the public evidence of it to be preserved? 

5. The apostles, the disciples of Christ, followed preach- 
ing as a trade, and lived at their ease upon the credulity of 
the multitude after Christ's death. St. Paul, who was a 
tent maker, absolutely boasts of his disinterestedness for 
having worked a short time at his trade, while he travelled 
about as a preacher ? Even the brothers, the family of 
Jesus Christ, who deemed him, while living, an impostor, 
and who had the best right to judge whether he was so or 
not, quitted their business, and travelled about with their 
wives, subsisting on the credulity of the ignorant believers. 

The most learned of the first christians, who were afterwards considered 
heretics, by the ruling party, " denied the humanity of Christ." 

11 Within the immediate year of the alleged crucifixion of Christ," says 
Mr. Taylor, " or sooner than any other account of the matter could have 
teen made known, it was publicly taught, that instead of having been 
miraculously born, and having passed through the impotence of infancy, 
boyhood, and adolescence, he had descended on the banks of the Jordan in 
the form of perfect manhood ; that he had imposed on the senses of his 
enemies and of his disciples, and that the ministers of Pilate had wasted 
their impotent rage on an airy phantom." Cotelerius has a strong passago 
to this effect, that, " it would be, as it were, to deny that the sun shines at 
mid-day, to question the fact that this was really the first way in which the 
gospel story was related." Ibid, p. 368. 

Cerdon, though a christian, taught that " our Saviour Jesus Christ, was 
not born of a virgin, nor did appear at all in the flesh, nor had he descended 
from heaven ; but that he was seen by men only putatively, that is, they 
fancied they saw him, but did not see him in reality, for he was only a 
shadowt and seemed to suffer, but in reality did not suffer at all." Ibid, p. 369 , 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 15 1 

Are such men competent witnesses to prove the truth of the 
lie that supports them? 

6. All the apostles, and the populace whom they ad- 
dressed, were of the lowest and most ignorant dass of the 
community; untaught ignorant men. Acts it. 13. They 
were not capable of judging, and do not appear to have 
taken any pains to investigate ; for instance, whether a 
person pretending to be sick was really so ; whether the 
cure was real or pretended ; whether it was effected by 
casting out a pretended devil, that occupied the patient, or 
by curing epileptic fits ; whether the cure was momentary 
or permanent, &c. 

These apostles, then, are open to every objection to 
which any incompetent witness can be liable. They 
were ignorant ; they were interested ; they formed a reli- 
gious party ; they lived by it as a profession ; if any of 
them wrote our modern gospels, they contradicted each 
other in several important particulars, especially as to the 
resurrection. They notice as true, facts impossible ; such 
as the graves opening, the dead arising, and parading 
through the streets of Jerusalem ; they notice as true, phe- 
nomena that must have been noticed and recorded by 
every philosopher and historian of the time, as the earth- 
quake and darkness at the crucifixion, wherein no writer 
whatever corroborates them ; they relate the most impro- 
bable occurrences, and the most useless and suspicious 
miracles, upon the slightest hearsay evidence, with no at- 
tendant care of investigation so as to remove doubt and 
suspicion ; and as to the very existence of Jesus Christ, it 
is rendered extremely dubious, by the omission of any 
mention of him by Philo Judeeus, his countryman and 
contemporary, and by Josephus, who was born within a 
year or two of Christ's asserted crucifixion. 

Who has a right to assert the existence of a man upon 



152 



LECTURE VI. 



the evidence of these evangelists, who were themselves 
never named until 150 years after the death of the sup- 
posed author of Christianity ? That some seditious fanatic 
may hare been put to death under the procuratorship 
of Pontius Pilate, is possible ; and that he may have had 
disciples, like Johanna Southcote, or Jemima Wilkinson, is 
possible also ; and that the Gentile followers of this Jew 
malefactor may have named him Christos, anointed, is 
possible also ; but it is next to impossible, that the Jews, 
who spake Syriac, should have dubbed their religious 
leader by a Greek title. This apjvellation is manifestly the 
after thought of some Gentile fanatic. 

The time is approaching, gradually, indeed, but surely, 
when this outrageous system of fraud and robbery — this 
imposition upon the understanding of the weak and the 
ignorant, for the purpose of obtaining their money under 
false pretences, will be consigned, as it deserves, to public 
execration. The friends of mankind, however, must in- 
termit no effort to enlighten the ignorant, and expose, under 
ail its aspects, this baneful imposture.* 

* Melito, bishop of Sardis, who lived about A. D. 144, in his address to the 
emperor Marcus Antoninus, says, " For the philosophy which we profess, 
truly flourished aforetime among the barbarous nations 3 but, having blos- 
somed again, (or been transplanted,) in the great reign of thy ancestor 
Augustus, it proved to be above all things ominous of good fortune to the 
kingdom/ 7 See the whole of this passage, in the Diegesis, p. 319, on which 
Mr. Taylor makes the following remarks : " This document — and it is 
wholly indisputable— is absolutely fatal to all the pretended historical evi- 
dences of Christianity, inasmuch as it demonstrates the facts — 

1. " That it is not true that christians, as such, had ever, at any time, 
been the objects of any extensive or notorious political persecution. 

2. " That it is not true that Christianity had any such origin, as has 
been generally imagined for it. 

3. "That it is not true that it made its first appearance at the time generally 
assigned ; for nporepov qKpaazv -, it had flourished before that time. 

4. " That it is not true that it originated in Judea, which was a province 
of the Roman Empire ; for it was an importation from some foreign coun- 
tries, which lay beyond the boundaries of that empire." p. 329. 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 153 

The Rev. Mr. Jeremiah Jones, in his " New Method," 
vol. 1, page 70, lays down the following among other pro- 
positions for ascertaining the genuine or apocryphal cha- 
racter of any book ; in which we cordially agree, and re- 
quest the reader to apply them for himself: — 

" That book is apocryphal which contains conlr.idic- 
tions, or which contains histories, or proposes doctrines, 
contrary to those which are known to be true ; or which 
contains ludicrous, trifling, fabulous, or silly relations ; or 
which contains anachronisms; or wherein the style is 
clearly different, from the known style of the author whose 
name it bears." 

All this is reasonable. But do the evangelists contain 
no contradictions ? No relations in opposition to known 
facts? No accounts, ludicrous, trifling, silly, or fabulous ; 
is the devil tempting Christ, none such ? Is the miracu- 
lous conception, or the miracle atCana, none such? How- 
ever, let the reader judge. 

I proceed, according to my proposal, to compare, in a 
general icay, the value of religion, particularly of the 
christian religion, with the evils that arise from the 
abuse of it. 

From the very earliest appearance of the christians, 
and Christianity, the earth has been overrun with bigotry, 
intolerance, private disputes, public war — with envy, ha- 
tred, and malice, and all uncharitableness ; specially impu- 
table to the quarrels of christians among themselves. The 
christians, from the very outstart of the sect, were univer- 
sally detested : odiohumani generis convicti, says Taci- 
tus. The christian writers, as a class, were the most 
abandoned liars, forgers, interpolators, mutilators, and de- 
stroyers, that the whole history of literature, from the be- 
ginning of knowledge to the present day, is able to present 
to us. There has been nothing like them : nothing so 



154 LECTURE VI. 

shamelessly abandoned. Of all this I hope I have pro-, 
dyced ample proof, from the acknowledgment of christian 
diviaes. Then why did these divines believe in Christian- 
ity ? Because man is a creature of circumstances. Be- 
cause they were bred from infancy to manhood among 
christians ; because every body around them, their mo- 
thers, their nurses, their fathers, their teachers, their older 
and revered friends, their own companions, w r ere chris- 
tians ; they were taught that it would be criminal to doubt 
the truth of Christianity; infidelity was held out to 'them 
as an unpardonable crime ; they were brought up to the 
profession of Christianity as to a trade by which they were 
to gain wealth, and consideration, and respect, among their 
countrymen ; they w T ere ruined in all respects if they re- 
nounced their error, however deeply convinced of it. How 
much of all this operates among professing christians at 
the present day, and even in this country ! But certainly 
with nothing like the force here that it does in Europe. 
Still, I cannot help feeling deeply the excuses for hypoc- 
risy that arise from this state of things. The prevalence 
of education and a free press, are alone competent to cure 
the evil. But all education here is, as yet, an abominable 
fraud, and a most unjustifiable abuse of the power acquired 
over the infant mind ; we have yet a bigoted public, nor, in 
this most enlightened country upon the earth, is the press 
as free as it is in England and Germany. 

What does this religion of miracles amount to ? Grant- 
ing that the silly and trifling miracles of the New Testa- 
ment took place, they were miracles only to those who 
saw them ; they are only human testimony to me. Con- 
sidering the innumerable instances of human testimony 
bearing witness to miracles that we know to have been 
frauds, the result of experience is, that every alleged mi- 
racle is in a high degree improbable. Certainly it is incre- 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 155 

dible, if any reasonable objection can be made to the tes- 
timony in favor of it. Is there a human creature bold 
enough to say, after due investigation, that there are not 
many very strong, indeed, unanswerable objections to the 
christian miracles, external as to their evidence, and inter- 
nal as to their character ? Is there any person who has 
effrontery enough to deny that the question has many 
and serious doubts and difficulties? But if such doubts 
and difficulties really exist, they are conclusive against the 
system that involves them. For does the Almighty deal 
darkly with his creatures ? Does he require, on pain of 
punishment, full faith in a doctrine beset with difficulties 
on every band ? What reasonable man can believe this ? 
Such a doctrine, so involved in clouds and thick darkness, 
may be the result of the imperfect faculties, and very defi- 
cient knowledge of fallible men, but it cannot proceed 
from divine omnipotence and perfection : if God be all 
wise and all good ; if he be pre-eminently the God of 
truth— doubt, and difficulty, and error, and falsehood, and 
fraud, and forgery, are not the means of conviction he 
would condescend to employ ; whatever the priest may 
teach to the contrary. Consider further what kind of a 
God Christianity presents to us. A being, who, if we may 
believe the Old Testament, is wrathful, irritable, revenge- 
ful, cruel, unforgiving, capricious, proud, tyrannical — a 
compound of all the worst passions with which the chris- 
tian priests have clothed their devil. This is the being we 
are commanded to love and adore ! To such a being we 
are to offer prayers, and render thanks ! For what ? Is 
he to be moved from his purpose by prayers and entrea- 
ties like a silly woman ? Cannot he bestow w r hat is need- 
tbi, without beseeching and flattery ? Then, again, for 
what are we to thank him ? Did we place ourselves 



156 LECTURE VI. 

here ? Did he not place us here for his own good will and 
pleasure, to serve his own purposes, not ours? 

Oh, but he is the great and omnipotent creator, and 
moral governor of the universe ! Is he so ? What proof 
is there of this ? I know of none. I know of no creator 
extraneous to, and different from, the universe I behold. 
How, you say, could the universe create itself? How, say 
I, could God create himself? Oh, but he has existed 
from all eternity ! Has he so ; so then has the universe ; 
there is at least as much proof of the last assertion as of 
the first. God, you say, is the moral governor of the uni- 
verse. Is he so ? A very miserable one then he is. Why 
does he permit so many innocent beings to be destroyed, 
or reduced to misery, by earthquakes, by wars, by pesti- 
lence, by famine, and all the multitudinous evils that prey 
upon mankind ? 

Either God could put an end to moral and physical 
evil, and he will not, or he is willing to do it but he can- 
not, or he is neither able nor willing. What, then, becomes 
of his attributes — his infinite power and infinite goodness? 
Here, says a priest, holding up the bible — here is the word 
of God — here is the book of divine inspiration, containing 
every truth necessary to eternal salvation. But God has 
appointed an order of men, to instruct their fellow crea- 
tures by explaining, illustrating, and enforcing these 
divine truths. This order of men is the christian clergy. 

Indeed ! so it appears that God Almighty has spoken so 
unintelligibly, that it requires 12,000 clergymen in Eng- 
land, as many in the United States, and 100,000 more 
throughout Europe, to supply God Almighty's deficien- 
cies, and to explain what he has spoken darkly and unin- 
telligibly ! Is it so ? Well, begin ; explain to us. Oh, 
no ! say the clergy ; you must first engage to pay us 
from 1000 to 4000 dollars a year each ! Is it worth while 



EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY. 157 

to keep an army of parsons in perpetual pay at this rate, 
to perpetuate this deception — to preach up falsehood as if 
it were solemn truth — falsehood that they know to be so ; — 
is it for the public good to encourage this system of exact- 
ing money under false pretences ? Is it, or is it not, swind- 
ling?* 

* "If the evidences of the christian religion are presumed to be its di- 
Tine effects upon the dispositions and conduct of its professors ; the pecu- 
liar generosity and liberality of christians towards the enemies and 
opposers of their faith ; their willingness to have its foundation thoroughly 
sifted and examined ; their readiness at all times to acquaint themselves 
with all the objections which can be brought against it, by whomsoever, 
or in what manner soever, those objections may be urged ; their ti^rrence 
of ail acts of slander and defamation, for the sake of excusing themselves 
from the trouble of enquiry ; their immaculate innocence, not only of per- 
secution direct and overt, but of the dispositions that could po*sibly loud to 
persecution; their more rational piety, their more exalte virtue, thedr 
more diffusive benevolence. Alas ! where are those evidence* 7 

" We have looked for historical evidence which might justify a rational 
man to himself, in believing the christian religion to be of God. And there 
are none — absolutely none. We enquired for the moral effect* which the 
prevalence of this religion through so many ages and countries of the 
world, has produced on men's minds, and we find more horror*, crime*, 
and miseries, occasioned by this religion, and its bad influence on th« hu- 
man heart ; more sanguinary wars among nations ; more bitter feud* and 
implacable heart burnings in families ; more desolation of moral principle ; 
more of every thing that is evil and wicked, than the prevalence of any 
vice, or of all vices put together, could have caused : so that the evidence 
which should make it seem probable, that God had designed this religion 
to prevail among men, would only go to show that he had designed to 
plague and curse them. But not so ; christian, hold first ! and ask thine 
own heart if thou hast not charged God foolishly. Ask thine own con- 
victions, whether, if a religion were the wickedest that ever was upon earth, 
end as false as it was wicked, God himself could give thee any more likely, 
or fairer and sufficient means to emancipate thy mind from it, than the means 
thou hast here, (if thou wilt use them) to discover the real origin, charac- 
ter, and evidences of Christianity. If thou believest there is any God at 
all, at any rate, thou should also believe that he is a God of truth ; and so 
sure as he is so, so sure it is, that the pertinacious belief of any thing as 
true, which we might, by the free exercise of our rational faculties, come to 
discover to be false, is the greatest sin that a man can commit against him ; 
implicit faith is the greatest of crimes ; and the implicit believer is the most 
wicked of mankind." Taylor's Diegesis, p. 413. 

14 



LECTURE Vn. 



CONCLUSION. 
" Pwyo all things; hold fast that which is good." 1 Thes. v. 21. 

[In this concluding lecture,* before giving my own con- 
clusion, 1 ehall first give you the conclusion of my learned 
and worthy friend, which being but recently received, did 
not appear in the Correspondent, nor was it delivered in 
the Hall ; but I add it here as a valuable appendage. It 
was written after a careful review of all that appears in the 
essays, and as a conclusion to the whole matter.] 

Hance it appears, that the historical evidence in favour 
of the christian scriptures, is deficient in every particular 
that men of good sense universally require to confer au- 
thenticity on history. 

The best evidence, the writing or authentication of 
Jesus Christ himself, is totally wanting ; nor was his as- 
cension made in public, as it ought to have been. All the 
accounts we have are hearsay, second-hand stories. No 
means have ever been given of tracing them ; no one 
knows who wrote any of the gospels ; when they were 
written ; where they were written ; in what language they 

* This lecture is cut off from the sixth, being otherwise too long. Iti«> 
therefore, shorter than the others ; but the matter will be supplied by a 
supplement from another hand. 



CONCLUSION. 159 

were written ; why they appear in the Greek language, 
which the great mass of the Jews did not speak or read. 
No one knows why they did not appear originally in the 
Syriac, spoken as the common language of Judea. 

No one knows why these supposed authors, Matthew, 
Mark, Luke, and John, do not appear as the authors, or 
claim the credit of the writings thus ascribed to them. 

No one knows why these persons are not named as the 
authors of the gospels till 180 years after the christian era. 

No one knows upon what grounds and reasons these 
silly and contradictory documents were selected from fifty 
forgeries, equally credited for more than a hundred and 
fifty years, and apparently having equal claims. 

No one knows how it happens, that these writings 
should be received as genuine, notwithstanding the many 
and important interpolations contained in them, now known 
to be so ; and after the mutilations and corrections, and 
expunging of silly and incredible passages, by order of the 
Emperor Anastasius. 

No one knows how it happens, that a Greek epithet is 
bestowed upon a Jew malefactor. 

No one knows where these accounts first appeared ; 
silly, unlettered men like the apostles, *»Jjjff$ cty^ufijAxrot %at 
sham, from the lowest class of the people, would not write 
to the multitude in a language which, to the multitude, 
was a foreign language. Josephus wrote in Syriac. 

All the apostles and first christians appear to have been 
interested to support the imposture. They made their 
living by it. They worked on the credulity of the early 
converts to institute a community of goods, of which these 
charlatans appointed themselves governors and distributors. 

Christ's own relations, who treated him with marked 
contempt throughout his life, lived in ease and luxury on 



TOO LECTURE VII. 

the credulity of his followers after his death. This St. 
Paul relates. 

Histories thus tainted with every mark and character 
of fraud and forgery, are held up by the lying priests of 
modern days as being of divine origin, and containing" 
divine truths. Whereas, it was as easy for the divinity to 
present the world with an account free from all reasonable 
objection, as with the present very suspicious and unsatis- 
factory set of relations, written by men unknown, unlet- 
tered, ignorant, and interested. 

None of these accounts are verified by any cotemporary 
pagan writer. The sect of christians, indeed, are men- 
tioned as existing, and as being remarkable for their infa- 
mous conduct and character ; but we possess no historical 
corroboration or authentication of the writings called the 
gospels ; winch no sensible man among the pagan authors 
of repute knew of, or credited if they did. Nor is there 
atfiy evidence whatever — no, not one tittle, that the scrip- 
tures of the Old Testament are, in any respect, authentic 
as to Uk facts, or genuine as to the authors to whom they 
are ascribed ; not one corroborating historical evidence con- 
cerning them exists. They are full of anachronisms, and 
bear indubitable marks of being (one and all) composed 
after the horde of barbarians called Jews, were permitted to 
return from Babylon to Judea. Yet have the christian 
priesthood the insolent hardihood to talk of the divine au- 
thority of this gross imposture ! No wonder ; their voca- 
tion is imposture. Philo Veritas. 

[Now, my friends, what shall we say to these things? 
Agreeably to my original purpose and determination, I 
have laid before you all the important facts contained in 
the essays of " Philo Veritas," a lover of truth, as pub- 
lished in the Correspondent, and which I have embodied 



CONCLUSION. 161 

in these lectures. If you know the impression they have 
made on your own minds, you may, in some measure, 
judge from that, what impressions they must have made on 
mine. To be candid, I must admit, they contain much 
information which is entirely new to me. It is true, I was in 
possession of many of these facts before, which had led me 
to nearly the same conclusion, on the whole, at which I have 
now arrived ; and on that account, perhaps, I have been 
more inclined to believe what is here stated. As the learn- 
ed author of these essays has quoted fairly the works I 
Lave read, so far as he has made use of them, I have rea- 
son to believe that the others, to which I have no access 
at present, are equally fairly quoted. For one, I shall 
think so, till I see it proved to the contrary.* I have deli- 
vered nothing from the essays which appears to me to be 
erroneous, in point of fact, without noticing and correcting 
it. The principal error which I have discovered is, if Ta- 
citus be good authority, (but I am convinced the pas- 
sage is not his,t) there were christians at Rome in the days 
of Nero, prior to the destruction of Jerusalem ; whereas 
Veritas only admits that this evidence proves the existence 
of the christians in the days of Tacitus ; that is, " towards 
the close of the first century." But this is not material. 
It proves nothing to the point, after all. 

The language of Veritas is, perhaps, sometimes too 
severe ; but it is necessary that the people hear something 
that will not only open their eyes, but also rouse their at- 
tention. If the many frauds committed by the ancient 
fathers of the christian church, were originally intentional, 
and used for party purposes, rather than the public good ; 

* Since delivering these lectures, I have read Middleton's Free Enquiry ; 
also Taylor's Diegesis, and am fully satisfied, that the facts, as set forth in 
the essays of Philo Veritas, are incontrovertible. 

t See note A. in the Appendix. 

14* 



162 LECTURE VI. 

and if they are now perpetuated with the same know- 
ledge, and from the same unhallowed motives, then, as no 
deed can be more reprehensible, so no language can be too 
severe to express the indignation that every honest man 
must, and ought to feel towards such procedures. But if 
people can be so blinded by a false education as to 
think that the common people may be deceived for their 
good, and deceive with such a pure, though ignorant 
motive, while we would equally deprecate the deception, 
the deceiver is rather to be pitied than blamed. Know- 
ing, therefore, how difficult it is to get rid of early im- 
pressions, however erroneous, we would recommend all 
possible charity towards those deluded mortals (especially 
as we have once belonged to the number) who really think 
it is best for mankind to believe in at least some of the 
miracles and wonderful Etories taught in the Bible, whether 
they are true or not. As the Bible is supposed to contain 
one glorious truth, although fraught with a thousand lies, 
yet it is better, as some suppose, for mankind to believe the 
whole, and a thousand more foolish stories of the same 
stamp, than not to believe in this great and glorious 
truth ! But supposing this supposed glorious truth should 
turn out to be nothing more than a pious lie ; what then ? 
Is it best for mankind to believe a thousand foolish lies, 
for the sake of believing in one single fact that is acknow- 
ledged to be good if true, but which may not be true after 
all. As soon as it is found that mankind can be equally 
happy, and a thousand times more rational and consis- 
tent, in believing nothing but what is susceptible of proof, 
and to believe just in proportion to the strength of the evi- 
dence they have received ; and also, that all the benefit 
there is, or can be, in believing in any thing that is past, 
is only on account of the present conclusions, or the future 
prospects, that such a belief affords us, then people will be- 



CONCLUSION. 163 

gin to reason, not only on the truth, but also on the utility 
of every proposition presented for their consideration, whe- 
ther true or false. Let us first ask ourselves, is it any 
thing that affects or concerns us now ? Is it any thing 
that will affect us at any future time ? Or is it interest- 
ing only as a matter of curiosity ? If neither of these, it 
is not any thing that deserves one moment's considera- 
tion. 

To-day is just as valuable to me, whether there be ano- 
ther day for me or not. Nothing future can enhance the 
value of to-day. Nothing future should, nothing future 
would, if we were properly educated, lessen its value. If 
it be true, as we read, " sufficient for the day is its own 
trouble," it is equally true, sufficient for the day is its 
own joy. If we anticipate only what is rational and true, 
the anticipation can do us no harm. It only prepares us 
for the actual enjoyment, or the actual suffering. If we 
anticipate w T hat is neither rational nor true, we enjoy but 
an imaginary good, (if good it can be called,) or we en- 
dure an imaginary evil, which will never be enjoyed, or 
endured, in any other way. Now, who wants to feast on 
mere imagination, or to take trouble on trust, by antici- 
pating it beforehand ? 

Let us, then, throw away at once all our imaginary 
and visionary dreams ; all faith in things unseen, or in 
worlds unknown, and begin the world entirely anew. 

Now, give us facts, and we will consider them ; but we 
have done with fictions. Let us no longer use words that 
we do not understand, or words to which we have attach- 
ed no definite meaning. 

What are meant by the terms God, devil, heaven, 
hell, angel, sold, spirit ? Is not the meaning which is 
generally attached to each of these words perfectly vague 
and indefinite ? Do they mean any thing except what 



164 LECTURE VII. 

exists only in the imagination? If so, why can they not be 
defined ? Were it not for fashion and custom, I should no 
longer have occasion to use any of them. If I still retain 
and make use of the term God, it must be in a very diffe- 
rent sense from what I have ever used the term before. 
This term once conveyed to my mind the notion (for I 
cannot call it idea) of some great being, unknown to me, 
but who, as I supposed and believed, had made himself 
known in former times to some of his creatures ; that he 
had a throne somewhere in the universe, and sat upon it ; 
that he had his messengers, or angels, who were constantly 
employed in his service, and who executed his will ; that 
Jesus was his son, &c. I at length concluded that this 
idea was too gross, and imagined that God was an im- 
material being, who was every where present ; but though 
immaterial himself, he had power over all material bodies, 
as he had made them all. My notion of angels, devils, 
(fee. was still about the same as before. But as my mind 
progressed in knowledge, in chymistry, geology, &c, and 
I became a little better acquainted with real matter, I saw 
the impropriety in supposing that immateriality could pro- 
duce materiality ; or that, being produced, or existing, it 
could have any effect upon it. This led me to conclude 
thet God (who, as I still supposed, was absolutely indispen- 
sable,) must be a vital fluid of real matter, perhaps the ele- 
mentary principle of all matter ; but, whether he was so 
or not, I conceived all matter, originally, to have been self- 
existent, or eternal in its nature. These latter notions 
have been my views for about twelve or thirteen years ; 
and, even now, I have no evidence of, neither do I believe 
in, the creation of matter. But the study of botany and 
physiology has taught me, that what we call life in plants, 
or sensation, and all the phenomena connected therewith, 



CONCLUSION. 165 

in animals, is the effect, and not the cause of organiza- 
tion. Hence there is no such thing as life or intelligence 
(that we know any thing about) in the universe, except 
what is organic ; that is, the effect of organization. Hence 
I have arrived to the following conclusion, viz. that nature, 
throughout all nature, and in all her ramifications, ever 
did, and ever will, act like herself. Judging from all I 
know, there can be no doubt, in my mind, of this fact. 
Call it wisdom, call it power, call it fate, call it what you 
please — altering the name does not alter the thing. That 
there is nothing human, in any sense of the word, either 
in it, or about it, I am just as certain of, as I am 
certain that man is not the universe. And when we 
talk about intelligence, if it be not human intelligence, 
or the intelligence of animals that we mean, what do 
we mean by the term ? Hence I have no idea now, that 
my voice extends to any being in the universe, except 
to organized beings like myself, so as to produce any sen- 
sation or any effect whatever.* 

Let the universe, then, embracing all the heavenly and 
earthly bodies, move on in its course. We can neither 
accelerate nor retard its progress. Let us endeavor to 
catch the moments as they fly, so far as to enjoy them in 
passing : for, did we wish to retain them, we cannot. 
Time, therefore, to us, is very precious ; let none of it be 
Jo3t in fruitless toils, or be wasted in worthless pursuits ; 

* I have here expunged every thing which I advanced on the subject of 
pnyer, being convinced that the ground is altogether untenable in every 
sense uf the word in which prayer is thought to be useful by chrislians, 
and having since entirely laid aside the practice, I conclude that the re- 
marks on that subject may be dispensed with. To pray to the elements, 
is vain and unmeaning ; and to pray to ourselves, or to our fellow beings, 
in a formal manner, seems to be too farcical to be warranted by rational 
creatures. 



166 LECTURE VII. 

for time, once past, never did, never can return. Every 
moment produces some change. We shall never be again 
what we have been ; neither can we remain what we are. 
Be content, then, for the time being, to be as we are ; but 
let us better our condition if we can. And if we cannot 
better our own, let us try to improve that of posterity. 

The particles which at first constituted our being, came 
together in that particular form without our knowledge, 
will, or consent. We have been supported in being, and 
grown to maturity, through a well known process of or- 
ganic nature, and we yield obedience to this call, or pro- 
cess, because it gives us pleasure thus to do. It is a plea- 
sure to eat when we are hungry, to drink when we are 
thirsty, and all the duties and necessary business of life, 
with a few exceptions, afford pleasurable, rather than pain- 
ful sensations. Yea, the acts which are disagreeable in 
themselves, are necessary to our future comfort, and are 
performed for that purpose. In this way life is kept up, 
(unforeseen or unavoidable occurrences excepted,) as long' 
as life is, or can be desirable. Not that we always retain 
the same identical particles of matter, for these are con- 
stantly changing ; but we sustain life as long as life is de- 
sired, or else as long as it can be supported, or is supporta- 
ble. While life, therefore, is worth possessing, why should 
we not enjoy it in the best possible manner we can ? We 
have reason, wisdom, and discretion enough to do so, if we 
will only exercise the noble faculties we possess, and be de- 
termined to be no longer the dupes of an ambitious and 
aspiring priesthood. From such crafty to use a well known 
expression, I say, " Good Lord deliver us." Amen. 



SUPPLEMENT TO LECTURE VIL 



I shall here add, by way of supplement to the seventh 
lecture, something on the internal evidence of the truth of 
Christianity, as growing out of the books themselves ; and 
also, (though I hardly think it necessary) a few remarks 
on the passage in Josephus. 

The following are extracts from an unpublished lecture 
on the subjects to which they relate, and are added here 
with a view of making this work more complete. 

Our first enquiry then is, what evidence out of, or dis- 
tinct from the New Testament, can be found, that the 
name of Jesus Christ, or the sect of christians was known 
in Jerusalem, before the destruction of that city by Titus? 

The advocates of Christianity have, on this part of the 
enquiry, referred to the writings of Josephus, of Pliny, 
and of Tacitus, as affording evidence, not only of the ex- 
istence of Jesus Christ, but that his followers were recog- 
nised in Judea, previous to the destruction of Jerusalem. 

The passage attributed to Josephus, in which he is said 
to bear testimony to the character, miracles, and doctrines 
of Jesus Christ, is contained in the 18th book, chapter 3d, 
section 3d, of the English translation from the Greek, of 
his " Jeioish Antiquities" and is as follows : 

" Now there was about this time Jesus a wise man, if 
it be lawful to call him a man; for he performed many 
wonderful works. He was a teacher of such men as re- 
ceived the truth with pleasure. He drew over to him 
many of the Jews, and also many of the Gentiles. This 
was the Christ, or christian (o xc t<rT0 ^ 0VT ** V9 ) — ^ n ^ 
when Pilate, at the instigation of the principal men among 
us, had condemned him to the cross, those who loved him 
from the first, did not cease to adhere to him. For he ap- 
peared to them alive again, on the third day; the divine 
prophets having foretold this, and ten thousand other 
wonderful things concerning him. And the tribe (or sect) 
of christians, so named from him, subsists to this time.' 5 



168 LECTURE VII. 

Had the passage I have just read really been written by 
Josephus, it would have been a self-condemnation from 
the mouth of a Jew — indeed from any man but a chris- 
tian ; for who but one who actually believed in the divine 
mission of Jesus, could have said that Jesus was the 
Christ, and that he was a teacher of such men as re- 
ceived the truth with pleasure. Yet we know that 
Josephus was a most rigid Jew, and had been a priest, if 
not high-priest of his nation. 

Again, to say nothing of what Josephus is alleged to 
have affirmed in this passage, as to \v r hat the prophets 
said respecting the coming of Jesus, why was it that he 
did not mention the books of the New Testament, nor 
any one of them ? How came he not to notice any of the 
apostles ? He was born about the supposed period of Jesus' 
death, and writes the history of that period down to the 
taking of Jerusalem, at which he was present. This event 
happened about forty years after ; and although he was 
allowed to possess all the requisites for an historian — learn- 
ed, industrious, and candid — he says not a word about 
the evangelists; nor does he make the smallest allusion to 
the stupendous miracles said to have been performed by 
Jesus during his life; nor of the still more stupendous 
miracle of his ascension into heaven. 

Josephus's father must have been an eye-witness of 
these miracles, and could not have failed to tell his son 
respecting them. The historian himself was related to 
Mariamne, Herod's wife, and is minutely particular on all 
that prince's proceedings ; yet wholly silent as to the life 
and death of Jesus. Though neither concealing nor 
palliating Herod's cruelties, not a word does he say about 
his ordering the children to be massacred on an informa- 
tion that a king of the Jews was just born. According to 
the Greek calendar, the number of children put to death 
on that occasion amounted to 14,000. Of all the cruel- 
ties ever committed by all the tyrants tlkai every lived, thip 
was the most horrible. A similar instance is not to be 
found in history : yet the best writer ever the Jews had, 
the only one of any account among the Romans and 



SUPPLEMENT. 169 

Greeks, makes no mention of a transaction so very extra- 
ordinary, and so very dreadful. 

If Josephus had actually known, or believed any thing' 
about the pretended founder of Christianity, we should 
have expected to find something on the subject in his ac- 
count of the "Wars of the Jews." But in that work 
there is not a single expression which implies that he had 
ever heard of Jesus Christ, or of the names of the four 
evangelists as authors of any book or history whatever. 
Yet this work was written eighteen years before his " An- 
tiquities," when all these transactions were recent, and 
ready to occur to the historian. 

The authenticity of the spurious passage was long as 
strenuously defended as if the fate of Christianity had de- 
pended upon it. Dr. Chalmers, indeed, thinks it unde- 
serving of the least notice ; for he says, " the entire silence 
of Josophus upon the subject of Christianity, though he 
wrote after the destruction of Jerusalem, and gives us the 
history of that period in which Christ and his apostles 
lived, is certainly a very striking circumstance." In fact, 
it is now ascertained, beyond a doubt, that the interpolated 
passage is not in the original ivo? % k of Josephus, which 
was written in Syriac ; and we are indebted to the learned 
Photius for having ascertained, that the fraud w r as the 
pious work of a priest, named Cais, who lived in the 
third century, and who evidently w r as not aware that more 
than one copy of the work of Josephus was extant in the 
original. Eusebius, who has been charged with the for- 
gery, may have countenanced the fraud without having 
participated in it. But in either case the passage is not 
rendered the more genuine. 

Thus much for the famous or rather infamous passage 
in Josephus, which was clung to, like a drowning man 
clinging to a straw, till the common people got their eyes 
sufficiently open to see the fraud that had been practised 
upon them. The other extract from the unpublished lec- 
ture is the following : 

Having disposed of Mr. Leslie's " Short and Easy 
Method with Deists," in a way which, 1 trust, will prove 

15 



170 LECTURE VII. 

satisfactory to the individual who directed my attention to 
that work: I shall now proceed to the consideration of the 
third proposition, which, as I stated in the outset of these 
lectures, would found the groundwork, or basis, of this 
enquiry — namely — 

What evidence does the New Testament itself afford 
as to the existence of Jesus Christ, and the truth of the 
narrative which it contains respecting him ? 



Hitherto our attention has been directed to what may 
be regarded as the external evidence merely of the truth 
of Christianity. The question now to be discussed brings 
us to what is called the i/zternal evidence. 

And here I would remark, that although the contents 
of no book whatever can be admitted as evidence of the 
truth of the events which it relates, unless those events 
are probable, and are corroborated by other unexceptiona- 
ble testimony ; yet, if it can be shown, by an examination of 
the book itself, that it contains statements of a contradic- 
tory nature; and, more especially, asserts as facts what 
ore well known to be in opposition to history, it must then 
be laid aside as a work of fiction, by which nothing true 
can be established. 

That the New Testament narrates, as facts, what is 
proved by authentic history to be unfounded, is what I 
now mean to show from its contents. 

In the 23d chapter of Matthew, ver. 35, Jesus is made to 
say to his brethren, the Jews, " that upon you may come 
all the righteous blood shed upon the earth, from the blood 
of righteous Abel to the blood of Zecharias, the son of 
Barachias. whom ye slew between the temple and the 
altar." 

Now, on looking over the Old Testament, and the his- 
torical works of Josephus, we find no such event recorded 
previous to the time when this curse was pronounced by 
Jesus. But in the account given by Josephus of the siege 
of Jerusalem, (b. 4, c. 9,) it is stated, that thievery Zecha- 
rias, the son of Barachias, was murdered in the temple by 
the faction of Judas, called the zealots. 



SUPPLEMENT. 171 

This shows evidently, that the gospel of Matthew was 
not in existence until after the destruction of Jerusalem 
by Titus; that is, seventy years at least subsequent to the 
birth of Christ, and at least thirty-seven years after these 
words must have been spoken by Jesus, if thus spoken 
at all. 

From this it is manifest, that the supposed Jesus, who 
is said to have been executed in the reign of Tiberius, is 
a fictitious person, and that the words attributed to him in 
the passage just cited from Matthew, refer to a period nearly 
forty years 'posterior to the assumed date of his supposed 
crucifixion. 

The supposed prediction of the fall of Jerusalem, con- 
tained in the sequel of the same chapter, and in the follow- 
ing, is thus reduced to a historical narrative : " or, at 
least, coincides with the commencement of the siege, when 
it was easy to foresee the impending fate of Jerusalem, 
incapable of resisting the mighty power of Rome, espe- 
cially at a time when the Jewish people were a prey to so 
many intestine feuds and fanatical parties." 

The 18th chapter of Matthew furnishes another proof 
of the late date of the composition of this gospel, supposed 
to be the most ancient of the four. 

At ver. 17, it is said, " And if he shall neglect to hear 
them, tell it unto the church : but if he neglect to hear 
the church, let him be unto thee as a heathen man, and a 
publican." 

This law is taken from the pentateuch, and the word 
church means congregation, and is substituted for syna- 
gogue, or council of the elders among the Jews. 

But during the lifetime of Jesus, and for many years 
after his supposed death, the christians had no council that 
could be called a church having civil and religious juris- 
diction over its members. [That is, on the ground that 
the gospel narrations are true.] 

It is also unquestionable, that the primitive christians, 
such as Paul, continued to practice the ceremonies of Ju- 
daism, and that it was not till long after that they esta- 
blished separate communities for the decision of their own 



172 LECTURE VII. 

matters, without applying, as they had been in the prac- 
tice of doing, to the Roman tribunals. 

The term church, therefore, in the passage alluded to, 
is an additional and strong proof of the gospel of Matthew 
having been written long after the taking of Jerusalem 
by Titus, and when the christians were regularly orga- 
nized, and recognised a civil jurisdiction peculiar to their 
congregations. 

Matthew's gospel makes Jesus to say, (c. 11, v. 12,) 
" And from the days of John the Baptist until now, the 
kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the violent take 
it by force." Here, again, is another proof that this gos- 
pel was not written until a late period. John and Jesus 
were contemporaries. The latter, therefore, could not say, 
in the early part of his ministry, " from the days of John 
the Baptist until now? 

Luke, the alleged writer of the gospel under that name, 
and of the Acts of the Apostles, is supposed to have been 
a physician in Antioch. He addresses his book to Theo- 
philus, who was a bishop in Antioch about the middle of 
the second century. Dr. Lardner says, about the year 
168. Theophilus was a convert from the heathen world, 
and Luke thus addresses him : H Forasmuch as many 
have taken in hand to set forth in order a declaration of 
those things which are most surely believed among us, 
even as they delivered them unto us, which, from the be- 
ginning, were eye witnesses, and ministers of the word ; 
it seemed good to me also, having had perfect understand- 
ing of all things from the very first to write unto thee in 
order, most excellent Theophilus, that thou mightest 
know the certainty of those things wherein thou hast been 
instructed." 

From this statement it is obvious, that many others had 
written gospels before Luke undertook his history. But 
instead of his respecting either that of Matthew, Mark, or 
John, he is evidently dissatisfied with their imperfections, 
and sets about writing what he considers a better gospel 
than any that had appeared before him. He either knows 
not, or disregards Matthew's genealogy of Jesus. He is 



SUPPLEMENT. 173 

the only one who gives us any dates. But for his gospel, 
we should not know whether Jesus lived one. or one hun- 
dred years, excepting what Matthew has said about the 
slaying of the infants, and the flight to Egypt. Had 
Luke known that Matthew was a real disciple of Jesus, 
and that he had written a gospel, he could not have failed 
to have noticed him and his gospel as a guide. But, so 
far from this, he says that he has known the whole matter 
from the beginning, and seems to hint, that no one could 
know more of it than himself — which was likely to be 
true, if we allow that he began to write his gospel about 
the year 150. 

In Luke 2d, ver. 2, it is said, " And this taxing was 
first made when Cyreneus was governor." It is proved 
from history that Cyreneus could not have been governor 
till many years after the time this taxing is said to hf.re 
taken place. 

In the " Acts of the Apostles/' c. 5, v. 36, we read ol 
the rising of one Theudas, and a speech made, in conse- 
quence, by Gamaliel. By Josephus, this affair appears to 
have happened at least ten years after the period assigned 
to it by the writer of the Acts. 

We are led to believe, from different parts of the gos- 
pels, particularly in the account of two thousand hogs 
having been compelled to form a union with a legion of 
devils, which proved their destruction, that the Jews were 
extensive dealers in pork, and actually fed great herds of 
swine for their own, and their neighbour's consumption. 

Now, the fact is, that not only the Jews, but the whole 
inhabitants of that part of Asia, have abstained from the 
use of pork from time immemorial. It is, therefore, utterly 
improbable, that any individual w T ould keep a herd of swine 
in that neighbourhood, and a strong proof that neither of 
the gospels which mention this circumstance, or the prodi- 
gal's son feeding swine, were written in Asia, nor by a na- 
tive of Asia. 

Throughout the whole of the epistles, there is no allu- 
sion to any particular known gospel, nor to any emperor 
or person in authority at the time when they were written, 

15* 



174 LECTURE VII. 

At the conclusion of the Epistle to the Romans, we, in- 
deed, find a piece of direct evidence against Christianity. 
The 25th and 26th verses are as follows : " Now to him 
that is of power to establish you according to my gospel, 
and the preaching of Jesus Christ, according to the reve- 
lation of the mystery, which was kept secret since the 
world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scrip- 
tures of the prophets, according to the commandment of 
the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the 
obedience of faith : To God only wise, be glory through 
Jesus Christ for ever, amen." 

I will connect with these verses the 6th, 7th, 8th, 9th, 
10th, 11th, and 12th, of the 1st chapter of the Epistle to 
the Galatians : 

" I marvel that ye are so soon removed from him that 
called you into the grace of Christ unto another gospel : 
which is not another ; but there be some that trouble 
you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ. But though 
we, or an angel from heaven, preach any other gospel 
unto you than that which we have preached unto you, let 
him be accursed. As we said before, so say I now again, 
if any man preach any other gospel unto you than that 
ye have received, let him be accursed. For do I now per- 
suade men, or God? or do I seek to please men? for if I 
yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of Christ. 
But I certify you, brethren, that the gospel which was 
preached of me is not after man. For 1 neither received 
it of man, neither was I taught it, but by the revelation of 
Jesus Christ." 

Here is Paul, admitting, after having preached a consi- 
derable number of years, that he knows nothing true of 
Jesus Christ, but that which Jesus Christ had revealed 
to himself ; and expressly declaring that this revelation, 
had been a mystery kept secret since the world began, and 
was only then first preached by himself 

This declaration, were there nothing else, would be 
sufficient to destroy all idea of the four gospels being au- 
thentic. 

The fact of the New Testament having been written 



SUPPLEMENT. 175 

in Greek, clearly corroborates what I have been contend- 
ing for. Had it been of Jewish origin, had Jesus been a 
Jew, and all his disciples Jews ; had Paul been a Jew, as 
stated in these writings ; is it not reasonable to suppose that 
the gospels and epistles would have been written in the 
Hebrew language, or rather Syro-Chaldaic, the language 
spoken in Judea at the time? The circumstance of their 
having been written in a barbarous Greek, or in a mixture 
of Greek and Asiatic, shows that the writers were illiterate 
persons ; and instead of proving that they were the work 
of the first century, or before the destruction of Jerusa- 
lem, plainly proves that they were the work of an after 
period, when the Hebrew ceased to be a national language 
by the utter dispersion of the Jews. 



END OF THE LECTURES. 



APPENDIX. 

[I shall here add a note by way of appendix, as I 
find I have room without exceeding my present limits. 
This, together with the extract from Wyttenbach, and 
what will follow, must be accepted in lieu of the eighth 
lecture, as the work has already exceeded the limits 
I at first proposed, and cannot be extended without en- 
hancing the price. Should this work meet with suffi- 
cient encouragement, and life and health being spared, I 
shall bring out another soon, on the supposed existence 
of God, distinct from matter, or any God possessing 
moral attributes, and the probable eternity of the 
universe, showing that there is no evidence in favor of 
the former proposition, and no existing proof against the 
probable truth of the latter, and that probability is all that 
can be alleged (as nothing can be affirmed) on either side.] 



Note A. See page 9*2. 

"The first publication of any part of the annals of Tacitus," says Mr. 
Taylor, in his Diegesis, p. 393, " was by Johannes de Spire, at Venice, in 
the year 1468. His imprint being made from a single manuscript, in his 
own pow<*r and possession only, and purporting to have been written in 
the eighth century. From this manuscript, which none but the most 
learned would know of, none but the most curious would investigate, and 
none but the most interested would transcribe, or be allowed to transcribe ; 
and that too, in an age and country, when and where, to have suggested 
but a doubt against the authenticity of any document which the authori- 
ties" had once cho*en to adopt as evidence of Christianity, would have sub- 
jocted the conscientious sceptic to the faggot ; from this, all other manu- 
scripts and printed copies of the works of Tacitus are derived : and conse- 
quently in the forty-fourth section of the fifteenth book of these annals, we 
have the celebrated pawetge." 

On p. 395, ho says, " This passage, which would have served the purpose 
o/ christian quotation, better than any other in all the writings of Tacitus, 
or of any pagan writer whatever, is not quoted by any of the christian 
fathers." 



APPENDIX. 177 

On p. 396, he says, " There is no vestige or trace of its existence any 
where in the world, before the fifteenth century." These, among other 
cogent reasons, he gives, in all twenty \ why he considers " this celebrated 
passage to be a forgery or interpolation upon the text of Tacitus." 

Respecting the letter of Pliny the younger, Mr. Taylor says, Diege«is, 
p. 404, " I leave the reader to give what consideration he may to the objec- 
tion* to the claims of this epistle, which I subjoin without the advantage of 
the lights Dr. Semler may have cast on the subject. 

1. " The undeniable fact, that the first christians were the greatest liars 
and forgers that had ever been in the whole world, and that they actually 
stopt at nothing. 

2. " The undeniable fact, that it was not the ignorant and vulgar among 
them, but their best scholars, the shrewdest, cleverest, and highest in rank 
and talent, who were the practitioners of these forgeries. 

3. " The flagrant atopism of christians, being found in the remote pro- 
vince of Bythinia, before they had acquired any notoriety in Rome. 

4. " The inconsistency of religious persecution, with the just and philo- 
sophic character of the Roman government. 

5. " The inconsistency of the supposition that so just and moral a peo- 
ple as the primitive christians are assumed to have been, should Imv been 
the first to provoke the Roman government to depart from ite urjversal 
maxims of toleration, liberality, and indifference. 

6. "The inconsistency of such conduct with the humane and dignified 
character of Pliny. 

7. " The use of torture, to extort confession ; torturing and tormenting 
being peculiarly and characteristically christian. 

8. " The choice of women to be the subjects of this torture ; when the 
ill usage of women was, in like manner, abhorrent to the Roman charac- 
ter, and peculiarly and characteristically christian. 

9. " The repetition of this letter in the one ascribed to Tiberianus, being 
precisely such a repetition as we find of the famous forgery of Josephus, 
in the Persic History of Christ, by Jeremy Xavier. A forgery having once 
been successful, it should seem, the christians must needs ply it again. So 
here is a second throw at the same game. 

" ' Tiberianus, governor of Syria, to the Emperor Trajan. 

" ' I am quite tired with punishing and destroying the Galilaeans, or 
those of the sect called christians, according to your orders ; yet they never 
cease to profess voluntarily what they are, and to offer themselves to death. 
Wherefore, I have labored by exhortations and threats, to discourage them 
from daring to confess to me that they are of that sect. Yet, in spite of all 
persecution, they continue still to do it. Be pleased, therefore, to let me 
know what your highness thinks proper to be done with them." Cotelr. 
Patr. Apostol. vol. 2. p. 181 ; Middleton extant, p. 201. 

" No rational man will doubt the forgery of this pretended epistle, which 



178 APPENDIX. 

though thrown earlier in time, is a palpable repetition of the good hit that 
hsu\ been made in the epistle, ascribed to Pliny. 

A I have no doubt at all of the forgery of the passage of Tacitus. But if 
the objections which I have stated, or any other, be really fatal to this of 
Pliny, I would recommend my reverend opponents, and all other assertors 
that the historical evidences of Christianity are unassailable to ***** * 
revile, defame, and injure their opponents as much as they possibly can ; to 
represent them as miserably ignorant, as desperately wicked, as fools, liars, 
mailmen, and idiots ; but above all, to treat both them and their writings, 
with the most sovereign contempt. — 'Tis the best they can make of their 
bad bargain." 

This information respecting Tacitus and Pliny, was received since these 
lectures were delivered. 



THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. 

(From the Correspondent, vol. v. p. 81.] 

Professor Stuari's arguments in favor of the authenticity 

of the epistle to the Hebrews, as ascribed to St. Paul. 

From vol. 1. of a commentary on that epistle, by Pro- 
fessor Moses Stuart, of Andover. 

Pa/itce?ius, who flourished about A. D. 180, and was 
principal of the christian school of Alexandria, is the first 
vniter who speaks of this epistle as being Paul's. 

Reply. Nothing of Pantcenus remains, but a fragment 
ia the ecclesiastical history of Eusebius, lib. vi. ch. 14 : 
what we have, is at second-hand only. Of the authority 
of Eusebius we shall treat by and by. 

Secondly, Puntoenus died 213, so that the time when he 
wrote or flourished, should be rather 200 than 180 of our 
era. 

Hence, the very earliest testimony of St. Paul being the 
author of an anonymous letter or pamphlet, is the second- 
hand assertion of a man who lived at least 180 [or rather 
150] years after the pamphlet in question was written, 
even if it were written in the time of St. Paul. King 
Charles was beheaded exactly 180 years ago : suppose 
an anonymous letter published at that time, should now 
for the first time be ascribed by a modern author to White- 



APPENDIX. 179 

lock or any other person of that day, without any reason 
assigned or any farther corroborating proof; would that 
be sufficient authority for believing Whitelock to be the 
author of it ? Should we not ask for the reasons why the 
modern writer ascribed it to Whitelock, that we also might 
judge of them ? 

Clemens of Alexandria, according to Eusebius, is of 
the same opinion with his predecessor Pantcenus. 

Reply. How did either of them know the author, at the 
distance of 180 or 200 years ; [or even 120, allowing 60 
years before Paul wrote ?] for they have not told us their 
reasons, nor has Eusebius for them. 

Origen, who died aged 69, A. D. 254, inclines to think 
that it is written by St. Paul. Professor Stuart, who re- 
moves dates as far back as he dares, gives us A. D. 220 
for Origen. 

Reply. This passage is also preserved by Eusebius. 

Secondly. In Origen's time, the authenticity of that 
epistle was doubted, as appears by Professor Stuart's cita- 
tion of Origen's words. From its being in a rtile unlike 
to St. Paul's, and from its being commonly ascribed either 
to Luke, or to Clemens Romanus. 

Justin Martyr, about A. D 140, alludes manifestly to 
this epistle as an authoritative book. 

Reply. Justin Martyr does not assert directly or indi- 
rectly that St. Paul wrote this epistle. The epistle may 
have been authoritative in the church : but this indirect 
and supposed allusion by a writer who died A. D. 163, is 
no authority whatever to prove the presumed authenticity 
of an anonymous letter. We want reasons and proofs. 
Besides, any man who has really perused the writings of 
Justin Martyr, will not give him credit for any thing like 
talent or judgment, and hardly for common sense. 

Methodius of Olympus in Lycia, A. D. 290, ascribes 
this epistle to St. Paul. 

Reply. What then ? Does the evidence grow stronger 
in proportion as it is distant from the time in question ? 

So does Pamphilus of Ccesarea, A. D. 294. 

Reply. What then ? So does Professor Stuart in 1828, 



180 APPENDIX. 

Is a naked authority 300 years after a fact, sufficient of 
itself to prove it ? 

Oh ! but Eusebius, the great Eusebius, about A. D. 
315. (Eusebius died 340) ascribes this epistle to St. Paul. 

I will not burthen these brief remarks, with the proofs 
of the shameful partiality of Eusebius as an historian, 
complained of by Baronius and Tillemont; nor of his 
infamous accusation of Athanasius, showing an utter dis- 
regard of all truth, honor, and honesty, when he wished 
to crush an adversary ; nor of his conforming to pagan 
ceremonies through fear ; nor of his shameful, slavish 
exaltation of Constantine into a saint ; nor of his false 
assertions as to the number of martyrs, in direct contra- 
diction to Origen ; nor of the infamous subserviency of 
the whole of his history to the support of the orthodox 
opinions of his day — if Professor Stuart denies these ac- 
cusations, he denies what he knows or ought to know to 
be true : but he dare not deny them: any more than he 
dare deny the fraudulent Economia of Origen, or the 
careless mistranslations of Jerom, or the similar frauds of 
Chrysostoni and others. 

I say, that Eusebius is not worthy of the least credit 
as an historian. I say that he not only practises, but un- 
blushingly professes to forge, to falsify, to lie for the good 
of the holy cause : that he defends, and justifies these 
shameful practices : and that he is liable to the very pro- 
bable suspicion of having forged the passages on which 
Professor Stuart so much relies, for the express purpose of 
establishing the authenticity of a previous forgery. 

Will Professor Stuart have the goodness to look at the 
title of the thirty-first chapter of the twelfth book of the 
Evangelical preparation^ of Eusebius. and read these 
words : — 

" How it may b^ lawful and fitting to use falsehood as 
a medicine, and for the benefit of those who want to be 
deceived." In this chapter, as Gibbon has already ob- 
served before me, he adduces a passage of Plato, which 
approves the occasional practice of pious and salutary 
frauds : nor is Eusebius ashamed of justifying the senti- 



APPENDIX. 181 

merits of the Athenian philosopher, by the example of 
the sacred writers of the Old Testament. Indeed, why 
not? sing tantarara, rogues all fyc. 

I do not care one cent about the authenticity of the 
epistle to the Hebrews, and therefore I do not dwell on the 
admissions of Professor Stuart against that authenticity, 
from Irenaeus, Hippolytus, Tertullian, Cyprian, Novatus, 
and Jerom ; all showing that the question rests only upon 
orthodox conjecture on one side, and tradition on the 
other, without one particle of proof on either. It is a ques- 
tion of no moment ; de Lara caprina. But it is of 
moment to the public to see upon what infamous authori- 
ties modern orthodoxy is willing to rest its cause. What 
dreadful rogues are converted into saints, to suit their pious 
purposes. No honest man can quote Eusebius as good 
authority, without forfeiting his own claim to common 
sense or veracity. I am sorry Professor Stuart's zeal has 
so blinded him. 

One word more to the professor. " I have not seen the 
third edition of your Hebrew grammar, nor do I know 
whether my present objection be removed. But when you 
published two editions of what you are pleased to call your 
Hebrew grammar, did you not shamefully appropriate to 
yourself, without reference or acknowledgment, the labors 
of another man ? 

u Is not your pretended Hebrew grammar, in substance 
and in fact, page upon page, not your grammar, but the 
grammar of Gesenius ? I say, that it cannot properly be 
called yours, and that it may properly be called his ; you 
are a translator, not a composer ; you conceal your origi- 
nals ; you have not done Gesenius the justice of one word 
of reference, citation, or acknowledgment, even where you 
copy his mistakes, as in the declensions. Is this honest ? 
This may be Andover ethics ; I hope you have taken out 
a patent right for this practice, and mean to confine it to 
yourself." So much for Professor Moses Stuart. 

My reason for troubling myself, or you, Mr. Editor, about 
this silly question of the Epistle to the Hebrews, is, to 
show what mere " knights of the post," these orthodox 

16 



182 APPENDIX* 

gentlemen rely on to keep on its last legs a gainful impos- 
ture, and to bolster up a dying cause. I wish your readers 
would read Dr. Middleton's account of the miracles of the 
four first centuries of the christian church, and the question 
will be set at rest. The fathers of the church, in point of 
learning, common sense, veracity, fidelity, accuracy, are, 
as a class of writers, absolutely beneath criticism. No 
honest man can read them without a perfect conviction of 
their being either fools, or knaves, or both : and I challenge 
Professor Stuart to contradict me. However, I do not 
want to have any thing more to do with or to say to that 
gentlemen or his friend Eusebius par nobile ! requies- 
cant in pace ! unless the professor should choose to call 
me out. Philo Veritas. 

Note. — My edition of the Evangelical Preparation of Eusebius, is by 
Francis Viger a Soc. Jesu, Presbyter. Paris, 1628. The passage cited is in 
page 607. 



Extracts from Letters addressed to the Editor of the 
National Gazette, Philadelphia. 

Sir — Your paper contains such frequent panegyrics on 
the christian religion, its divine origin, its absolute neces- 
sity to society and government, and so many vituperations 
against infidels, and their writings, that it is no wonder 
you are in high favor with the parsons, and all the ortho- 
dox old women (male and female) of your city. You 
seem to place yourself at the head of the light armed 
troops, the guerilla warfare against heresy and infidelity. 
Your paragraphs exhibit your zeal, if not your prowess ; 
and show your adherence to the holy alliance between 
church and state, and your pious hatred to all its oppo- 
nents. I will not do you injustice by attributing all this 
exhibition of zeal without knowledge to popularity hunt- 
ing — to the success of your paper requiring this stage 
play. I will not do this, suspicious as appearances may 
be ; because, from what I have heard of your character, I 
am disposed to consider you as a well meaning and honest 



APPENDIX. 183 

man ; better fitted, indeed, for skirmishing in paragraphs, 
than for any serious discussion requiring learned or labo- 
rious research, but sincerely expressing your real convic- 
tions. It is in this last and respectable character that I 
have taken the liberty of addressing you, and request that 
you would save, if you can, your favorite Bible, from the 
disgraceful charges that now, for the hundredth time, have 
been, brought against it, without the semblance of a reply 
or an apology, from its innumerable host of salaried advo- 
cates. In good truth, these Swiss troops who fight for pay. 
are not to be relied upon in time of danger. Non defen- 
soribus istis, tempus egit. The spirit truly is willing, 
but the head is weak. You will absolve us, however, 
from any impropriety in defending ourselves against your 
orthodox accusations, even though we should carry the 
war into the enemy's quarters. 

In your paper of Thursday, April 10th, 1828, I find an 
extract from a letter of some priest or other, more weak 
than wise, who signs himself X. ; and which your good 
wishes to the good cause, has induced you to adopt and in- 
sert. It commences thus : " No nation will be either 
prosperous or happy which conforms not its laws to the 
spirit of that system of moral precepts which the 
God of nature gave to the Jews, and which pervades 
with exquisite harmony the whole of the Old and New 
Testament." 

Now, sir, as your orthodox correspondent has written, 
and you in your wisdom have adopted this pious passage, 
you will not, I hope, complain, if those who dissent from 
your opinion should take the liberty of examining it, as I 
shall do. These vague and sweeping assertions, by men 
who are paid for making them, and who live by the im- 
posture they profess, can derive no support from authority; 
the question, then, is, as to the moral precepts which, 
with such exquisite harmony, pervade these books. How 
can we ascertain them but by referring to the books them- 
selves ? I have done so, with the aid of the second volume 
of the Correspondent, p. 269, as the ground-work of the 
three first letters which I propose to address you, viz. 



184 APPENDIX. 

1. Proofs of the filthiness and obscenity that pervade 
the Old Testament. 

2. Proofs of the cruelty, the revengeful spirit, the fraud, 
robbery, and falsehood, imputed in that book to God him- 
self, and to his avowed favorites, by precept, by example, 
or both. 

I grant all this has been repeatedly and abundantly 
shown ; but the hired advocates of Christianity suppress, 
and never notice the objections so strongly and repeatedly 
made to it. They treat it as if it stood like the axioms of 
mathematics, perfectly free from all possible objection ! 
This is not very fair conduct ; but it is consistent with the 
fraudulent cunning of the whole class of christian teach- 
ers. Hence, we have again and again to hold up, in 
strong characters, before the eyes of these blind leaders of 
the blind, the objections which they are determined not to 
see. Here, then, thou pious editor, and thou pious assertor 
of silly falsehoods, the Rev. Mr. X., whoever you may be, 
here ; look at this black catalogue ; reply to it if ye can ; 
and prepare yourselves for the two next specimens of 
scripture morality, which I mean to offer for your conside- 
ration. In the mean time, I thank ye for the opportunity 
ye have afforded of bringing forward this infidel defence ; 
for surely, if we are attacked, we have a right not merely 
to defend, but to recriminate. In future, it will be our 
duty to defend ourselves by carrying the war into the 
enemy's quarters. 

SPECIMENS OF FILTHINESS AND OBSCENITY. 

The story of Abraham, Sarah, and Hagar. Genesis 
xvi. I — 16. 

The account of Lot and his guests at Sodom, xix. 
1—18. 

The amours of Lot's daughters with their father, xix. 
30—38. 

The bargains of Rachel and Leah. xxx. 1 — 35. 

Catamenia. xxxi. 35. 

The ravishing of Dinah, &c. (fee. xxxiv. 1 — 31. 

Reuben and Bilhan. xxxv. 22. 



APPENDIX. 185 

Onan, Judah, and Tamar. xxxviii. 8 — 30. 

Potiphar's wife and Joseph, xxxix. 7 — 18. 

Cases of uncleanness described. Leviticus xv. 15 — 33. 

Prohibition of sexual intercourse, xviii. 1 — 30. 
\ Bestiality, xx. 1 — 27. 

• Whoredom of the Israelites. Numbers xxv. 1 — 8. 
iii Female captives ; cruelty towards them. xxxi. 17 — 35. 
. Tokens of virginity. Deuteronomy xxii. 13 — 30. 
\ Assault by a woman, xxv. 11. 
J' Circumcision. Joshua v. 1 — 8. 
\ Sodomy and lust. Judges xix. 22 — 29. 
f Ravishment, xxi. 1—25. 

Adultery and murder ; Abigail and Nabal. 1 Samuel 
xxv. 1 — 44. 

David, Bathsheba, and Uriah. 2 Sam. xi. 

Amnonand Tamar. xiii. 10 — 15. 

Absalom with David's concubines, xvi. 22. 

Solomon's 700 wives and 300 concubines. 1 Kings xl 3. 

Him that pisseth against ^vvall. 2 Kings ix. 8. 

Grind unto another. Job xxxi. 9, 10. 

The Song of Songs, which is Solomon's, i. to viii. 
throughout. 

Immodesty. Isaiah iii. 17. xlvii. 1 — 3. 

Nastiness. Ezekieliv. 13, &c. 

The same — very bad. xvi. throughout. 

The same. xxii. throughout. 

The same — very bad. xxiii. throughout. 

The same. Hosea i. 1 — 6. 

The same. iii. 1 — 3. 

There might be some additions to this horrible list ; but 
here is quite enough to show the character of these books, 
M'hich a lying and fraudulent priesthood have the daring 
impudence to ascribe verbatim et literatim, to the imme- 
diate dictation and inspiration of the Deity ! No instance 
of blasphemy can be adduced equal to this. No speci- 
mens of language too filthy for the most vulgar brothel, 
can be shown as employed in any other religion. The 
pagans were obscene ; but this is beyond mere obscenity. 
No wonder that brothels for peduasity were built all around 

16* 



186 APPENDIX. 

the temple at Jerusalem, and that, (using the words of St. 
Jerom,) pueris alienis adhoeserunt. Jerom on 2 Is. 
Boxius de sig. Eccles. 1. 7, ch. 4. Gaspar sanctius, ib. 4. 
12. These Jewish practices were in " exquisite harmo- 
ny" with the style of their own books. 

I appeal to the Editor of the National Gazette — I ap- 
peal to his Rev. correspondent X. — I appeal to any decent 
and well meaning reader of these pages — I ask of them, 
and each of them — would you, for any inducement under 
heaven, read aloud the passages I have referred to, to your 
family ? Would you dare to violate the chaste ears, or 
contaminate the virgin purity of mind of a young female, 
by reading to her these abominable expressions and de- 
scriptions ? I solemnly declare, I should shudder to my- 
self to copy at full length the citations to which I have in 
this letter obscurely referred. How, then, can the book 
w T hich contains them, be honestly recommended as favora- 
ble to decency and morality ? What are we to think of 
the class of teachers who Solemnly proclaim the book 
which contains these detestable passages, to be the word 
of God ! Aye, the inspired word of God ! And who 
maintain themselves in comparative idleness and luxury, 
by maintaining the divine character of this strange collec- 
tion ! 

There is hardly a family in the United States who does 
not possess a copy of the Bible. My assertions, therefore, 
concerning this book, and the passages referred to, can be 
verified or confuted at any moment. Deception is out of 
the question. To the Bible, therefore, I appeal ; to the 
law and to the testimony. Let our adversaries do the 
same ; and let us hear what defence they can make for 
facts impossible to be denied. Let those who will take 
the trouble of reading these passages, say, when they have 
done so, whether the epithets I have applied to them are 
not deserved. What inducement can a plain man like 
myself, who has no interest whatever to gratify in this 
question, but the interest of truth, of decency, and mora- 
lity — what interest can such a man have to complain of 
the religion of his country without cause ? What am I 



APPENDIX. 187 

to gain by it ? Surely neither profit nor honor. You pay 
none of your contributors, and you know not who I am. 
Nor have I any ambition to be known ; for so soon as I 
am known, so soon and so surely the rancorous hatred of 
an offended priesthood, with all the bad and merciless pas- 
sions that avarice and ambition can stir up, will be employ- 
ed to my injury ; nor shall I have any protection but my 
own insignificance. 

On the contrary, is not the interest of the clergy pledged 
to the truth of the falsehoods by which they subsist? 
Have they not a strong and manifest motive and interest 
to carry on the deception ? Think of the tribute they 
raise on public credulity in this city of New- York alone. 

The Roman Catholic church, well knowing in how 
many ways this Bible book is calculated to contaminate 
mental purity, forbids the indiscriminate use of it ; and 
properly. But, disgusting as the task is, I cannot help 
thinking, that every mother should read these passages, 
that she may judge whether tHte book containing them is 
a proper book for her children to read. 

I undertake to prove from the Bible, that the God of 
the Jews, adopted and enthroned as the God of the 
christians, is a being, unjust, and cruel beyond all records 
of human cruelty elsewhere to be found, vindictive, waver- 
ing, not knowing his own mind, deceitful, jealous, unfor- 
giving, and eternally punishing the innocent for the 
crimes of the guilty. A being of passions most detestable 
and truly diabolical. And that his great and acknowledged 
agents and favorites have been the most execrable villains 
known in the records of human history. 

To begin from the beginning. When he placed Adam 
and Eve in Paradise, he either knew they would eat of 
the Tree of Knowledge of good and evil, or he did not 
know it. If he did not, what becomes of his omniscience? 
If he did, was it not an act of wanton cruelty to tempt 
them deliberately to their destruction ? 

On account of the wickedness of the human race, he 
brought the deluge on the earth. Was there no milder 
method of reforming mankind, than that of extermina- 



188 APPENDIX. 

ting them. Et ubi desertum faciunt, (says the Goth, 
speaking of the Romans. ) pacem appellant. 

When God ordained the existence of the human race, 
their minds, their bodies, their faculties, their propensities, 
their dispositions, were derived from him : he framed and 
fashioned the human race after his own liking, and with 
such characters and tendencies as he chose. Why did he 
not give them better dispositions ? It rested with himself. 
Why punish them for the necessary results of his own 
management and ordination 1 He might have made them 
angels ; why did he choose to make them devils, and then 
wonder and complain that they were so ? Did he take any 
pains to instruct them better ? to reform ? No : he knew 
the career of wickedness to which he had destined them ; 
he let them run it without any kind of interference on 
his part, and then exterminated the whole race, for actions 
due to himself and the dispositions he had implanted ! 

But suppose, for a moment, that the men deserved 
punishment, why kill thepoor ignorant women and chil- 
dren ? what had they done ? Why drown the sheep, the 
oxen, the beasts, the birds, the insects ? what had they 
done? Quid meruistis oves, placidum pecus } inque 
tegeudos nati homires ? Quid rneruere Boves ? Tell 
me, Mr. Walsh, where can you find, out of this book, any 
thing more diabolical than this savage, indiscriminate 
cruelty, that overwhelmed, with cool deliberation, in one 
vast and universal destruction, the innocent and the 
guilty ? Can this be considered as answering the great 
end of all punishment, reformation ? This is what your 
worthy correspondent, I suppose, will call gospel morality ; 
divine justice ; wholesome example ! No wonder the 
priesthood are cruel by profession. What a pity it is you 
are not a priest ! Not even an abbe, or an ex-jesuit ! Come 
out boldly: lay aside your rancorous and skulking para* 
graphs, and defend this deluge if you dare. Who has yet 
replied to Voltaire T s poem on the earthquake at Lisbon l 
You may perhaps term all this ungentlemanly abuse. 
Cease then your sneers at infidelity, your pious denuncia- 
tions of heterodoxy, your wish for Paine's works to be 



APPENDIX. 189 

consigned to the flames. Had you not better reply to 

tVipm first. ? 



them first ? 

Before that sentence is decreed 'em, 
Do read 'em, Mr. Boreum, read 'em. 

Show us your patent right for exclusive abuse and scurrili- 
ty, in which you and the orthodox are so delighted to deal : 
else do not complain of the maxim, par pari referto ; or 
that we sometimes condescend to take the advice of that 
wise man of 700 wives and 300 concubines, and answer a 
fool according to his folly. If you have any thing like 
argument, out with it, let us have it, and we will then deal 
in argument alone. 

Examine attentively the following passages. Exod. xii. 
35, 36. Deut. xx. 16. vii. 2. xii. 6, 15, 17. Gen. vxii. 14. 
Exod. xii. Josh. vii. x. xx. Judges iii. 15. 1 Sam. xv. 
xvi. Psa. cix. cxxxvii. 2 Sam. xxi. 1. xxiv. 1. 2 Chron. 
xviii. 21. 

Of the Old Testament Attributes of the Deity. 

Read the following passages at length. Deut. xx. 25. 
ami. 20, 24, 28, 29. Deut i. 34. Ps. xcv. 2. Heb. iii. 11. 
Nahum i. 2, &c. Ezek. xxxviii. 18, 19. xx. 25, 21. Gen. 
vi. 6. See also the whole of chap. xiv. of Jeremiah. Ex. 
xxxi. 17. Judges ix. 13. Is. v. 56. xvii. 18. Zech. x. 8, 
Ex. xxxiii. 2. xxiv. 10, 11. xxxiii. 20, 23. Gen. xi. 4. 
6, 7. i. 26. Numb. iii. 11, 12, 14, 41. Levit. xxvii. Deut 
xxxii. 42. vii. 2 xxii. 29. 

So much for the moral precepts and moral practices of 
the God of the Old Testament. I will not dwell on the 
moral precepts and practices of those pious personages his 
favorites, the patriarchs and prophets ; it would lead me 
too far. Those who read their Bible with attention will 
have a tolerably just idea of them. Let Mr. Walsh and 
his parson find me, if they can, more reprehensible cha- 
racters than Abraham, Jacob, Samuel, David, Solomon, 
Ezekiel, Jeremiah, &c. 

The morality of the New Testament has been greatly 
vaunted, without much reason, as we shall see. 

The morality of the Gospel is very objectionable, as 



190 APPENDIX. 

appears in the actions and doctrines of Jesus and his 
Apostles. 

Instances of harsh language toward parents and rela- 
tions: Matt. xix. 29. Mark iii. 32. x. 29. Luke viii. 19. 
xiv. 26. John ii. 3. Matt. viii. 21, 22. Luke ix. 61. 

Instances of gross and vulgar abuse of the Pharisees 
and others, the prevailing and literary sect of the Jews ; 
calculated to excite the hatred and violence of the common 
people against them, in cases where reason and argument 
were called for, and where Jesus was clearly in the wrong. 
Matt. xvi. 1, 4. xxiii. the whole chapter. Mark xii. 38, 40. 
Luke xi. 37, to the end. John viii. 44. 

Instances of violent assault, and breach of the peace, 
Matt. xxi. 12. Luke xix. 45. 

Instances of his attempts to form a party among the 
populace. Matt. xxi. 9. &c. Mark xi. 10, &c. Luke xix. 
38, &c. 

Instance of his abuse of riches, and of rich men. Matt, 
v. 4. xix. 23, 24. Mark xii. 44. x. 21. Luke xvi, throug- 
hout, xviii. 22. Matt. xxvi. 10. 

Instance, of prevarication. John vii. 8. 

Instances of his making free with other people's property. 
Matt. x. 9, &c. Lukex. 4. ix. 1. vii. 26. xix. 30. 

Instances of very doubtful and unintelligible morality. 
Luke xvi. Matt. xxv. 14. Matt. xxii. Mark ix. 43. Matt, 
viii. 22. Luke ix. 60, <fcc. Matt. vi. 31. Luke xii. 16, 
&c. Luke xiii. 1—4. vii. 37. x. 40. Mark x. 21. Matt, xiii! 
12 — 14. xx. 1, &-c. John viii. 1, &c. 

Unintelligible doctrines, inculcated as matters of faith, 
necessary to be believed, John vi. 52, et seq. Nonresis- 
tance of injuries, and loving your enemies : the perpetual 
denunciation of riches, frugality, and forethought ; and the 
hatred inculcated against rich people, as in the parable of 
Dives, Matt. vi. 34. Luke vi. 20—30. xii. 16. xvi. 19—31. 

The preaching of superstitious and ignorant opinions : 
as the doctrine of demoniacal possessions; the cure of 
epilepsies, by the fasting and prayer of the prescriber; the 
frequency of evil spirits intermingling in human affairs, 
of which more hereafter. 



APPENDIX. 191 

His utter neglect of his mother and his relations, so 
far as appears through the whole course of his life. 

Precepts in hostility with the rules of common life. 
Luke vi. 35. Matt. v. 40. Luke vi. 20—34. xi. 25. xii. 
33. Romans xii. 20. 

The precepts in praise of poverty. Luke vi. 21 — 25. 
Matt. vi. 25—34. 

These doctrines evidently tend to the practice so dili- 
gently followed by the Apostles and their successors, and 
all the reverend divines of every sect, and every country, 
of living at ease upon the industry and credulity of others. 
But they are manifestly inconsistent with that conduct 
which is absolutely necessary to individual comfort, to 
domestic duties, and to national prosperity. His morality 
and benevolence was bigoted and confined ; I appeal to 
the whole of the 17th chapter of John, compared with the 
first general epistle of John. He declares that he prays 
not, he cares not for the world, but only for his particular 
disciples. Add his suggestion in favor of voluntary cas- 
tration, and against marriage. Mat xix. 12. 

FI here omit much for the want of room.] 

Such are the remarks on the Gospel Morality, which 
the silly panegyrics of Mr. Walsh and his clerical friend 
have induced me to arrange, and which they may refute, 
if they are able. I submit them to the consideration of 
your readers, and of every sincerely honest man in the 
community. The true precepts of morality, deduced from 
the relations of man toward man, as a social animal — 
based on the broad foundations of equal and general utili- 
ty, are the affairs of every man in society. The great 
precepts of morality, by which society is to be governed, 
and which alone it is the duty of society to sanction, are 
plain, true, and useful : founded alone on our duty to our 
neighbor, and his duty to his neighbor. Precepts which 
have nothing to do with religion, nor religion with them. 
Those rules of social conduct, w r hich are best calculated to 
produce the greatest good of the greatest number, consti- 
tute the only true Moral Code. Morality is the code of 
laws best fitted for our existence here, where we live in 



192 APPENDIX. 

society with each other, and obligatory only because they 
are in fact best fitted to promote the mutual happiness, on 
equal terms, of the members of society. Our social com- 
pact extends through this life only ; we make no contract 
about another. Religion embraces the views of our exis- 
tence in another state after death ; it is founded on selfish 
wishes and expectations ; on hopes, at best very dubious ; 
and on our fears of offending a being whom the christian 
scriptures depict as a proud, selfish, cruel, inexorable, jea- 
lous, wavering tyrant, punishing where it is impossible for 
him to be injured, and furious against the poor and weak 
creatures w 7 hom he has, for his own good pleasure, con- 
demned to crawl, for a certain time, on the surface of this 
earth ; why we were created 'tis hard to say ; for the facts 
that occur, seem plainly to indicate the presence of a care- 
less, wanton, and cruel being, as the governor of the uni- 
verse, if any governor, separate from the universe itself, 
there be. or by possibility can be. So prevalent is vice 
and misery over goodness and happiness, and so manifestly 
is it our duty to wage eternal war with the natural pro- 
pensities which are made to form a part of, and essentially 
belong to the animal man ! 

In submitting these remarks, it is manifest that I can 
possibly have no motive but to present just views, and to 
elicit truth. I can have no prospect of gain or advantage 
by them. The falsehoods propagated by the adversaries 
of my opinions, are those by which they are maintained 
in luxury and ease ; by which they acquire and maintain 
weight and importance in society ; by which they exhibit 
practically and triumphantly, that bigotry is the high road 
to respect and influence, that it is the duty of religious zeal 
to be intolerant, and that godliness in all its forms is great 
gain. Truth. 

[Note. — The above extracts are taken from letters published in the Cor- 
respondent, vols. 3 and 4. A different character of God can be shown from 
some parts of the Bible, but this only proves that the scriptures contradict 
themselves. These statements are true, whatever is true besides.] 



APPENDIX TO THE THIRD EDITION. 



THE following 12 pages are added as a second appendix to the Re- 
view of the Evidences of Christianity, &c. which work has now been before 
the public two years, during which time two editions have been sold, of 
500 copies each, and no attempt has been made, to my knowledge, either 
to answer its objections, or to prove its reasoning false ; or even to point 
out a single error, as to matters of fact, in any of the statements and refer- 
ences herein contained. 

The following letters addressed to the Editor of the Trumpet, which 
were published, with several others, in the Boston Investigator, will show 
that I have not been backward in avowing my opinions, however errone- 
ous they may be supposed to be, in order, if possible, to induce the clergy 
to undertake to enlighten my darkness, and give me and others good 
grounds, if they can, for more rational views of the subject. 

The public will not long be satisfied, when the question is asked, " why 
is not this work answered if it be not true ?" To be put off with the an- 
swer, " It is unworthy of the notice of the clergy ;" or with that equally 
cant saying, " There i3 nothing to answer." There is much to answer. 
The truth of all their dogmas which relate to God, to heaven, to hell, and 
to a future state of existence for man, in their sense of speaking, is called 
in question. The whole is treated as an idle chimera. Out of the multi- 
plicity of opinions, taught for solemn truth, in relation to supernatural op- 
erations, as well as to unseen beings and an unknown world, beyond the 
present life, after eighteen hundred years' preaching, the clergy are unable 
to prove any thing true for man beyond the grave. They are unable to 
prove the existence of what is called God, on which all other theological 
opinions depend. Hence the presumption is, that all those opinions are 
false. For the rule in law is, and should be applied in all controversies. 
affirmantes est probare ; and if we adopt the law maxim, de non a;>- 
parentibus et non existentibus eadem est ratio, the matter is settled ; 
for then, " we must apply the same conclusion to things that do not exist, 
and to things of whose existence there is no evidence." Cooper on LibeL 
p. 90. 

Sceptics have nothing to prove, but every thing to discover; henc« 
they are very properly called Free Enquirers. And he who affirms a pro- 
position, as being worthy of belief, and which he thinks all ought to be 
lieve, before he can demand the belief, or even the assent of another, it n 
incumbent on him to prove the proposition true. Let him do this, and 
there will be no occasion to demand belief, or point it out as a duty, be- 
cause belief will follow the proof as a natural consequence. Hence whec- 
ever the dogmas peculiar to theology, or Christianity, are demonstrated, or 
even proved, I am ready to believe them ; but until they are so, it is iby 
privilege to deny them, and I do deny them in toto. Neither am I alou* 
in these sentiments ; many avow them openly ; but where there is oi;o 

17 



194 SECOND APPENDIX. 

thus bold and fearlessly independent, there are many, perhaps hundreds, 
who hold these views in secret. But only let it be generally known that 
a man may eipre** his honest sentiments with impunity, without being 
despised Oaertfbr, except by those by whom it is an honor to be despised, 
and nine tenths of the whole community would at once discard all idea 
of supernatural, unorganized beings, sense without organs, or intelligence 
without eense ; and whoever should attempt to preach such things for truth, 
would be as much despised and ridiculed, even by children, as the bodzes 
(or priests) are on the island of Loo Choo. 

For the three first letters addressed to the Editor of the Trumpet, the 
reader is referred to the Boston Investigator, Vol. I. Nos. 17, 18, and 19, 
which are omitted here for the want of room. 



LETTER IV. 

To the Editor of the " Trumpet." 
IN my last I proposed some additional querfc* is order ta ajrira, if 
possible, at some corroct principles on which binnan society should be 
formed, so as to produce the greatest quantum of human happiness ; and 
come to the conclusion that it should be on sh* principle of perfect equality 
as to rights and privileges, totally regardless tf sex ; and I will now go 
one step further, and say, totally regardless of cfctar. I would rscommend, 
of course, to give up the torrid zone to the colored people, as they can 
best endure a vertical sun. Yet if white peo^'a are disposed to live with 
colored, or colored with white, that is no reasfc/J why cither should be en- 
slaved, or that all should not eifjoy equal rshilcges. What ! to marry 
each other ? Yes, to marry, if they love or fancy each other. There is 
no law against it, that I know of ; and thejo should be none. It is not 
what I should recommend or fancy myself : bat th/rt is no reason why I 
should wish to take away the right or priviK-g* of another; It is the 
right for which I am contending, and not the expediency, much less the 
propriety. 

We have now, perhaps, sufficiently matured the subject, so as to be pre- 
pared to propose and answer the question, " Waat laws wzidd you 
have in relation to matrimony ?" To which I answer. — Marriage is 
a civil contract between the parties, which stands upon the same basis of 
all other civil contracts, which are binding as long as the parties mutually 
agree, and no longer. The parties who make the contract, can dissolve it 
at pleasure, or by mutual consent. But if the parties cannot agree to 
separate by mutual consent, then it is necessary to call in a third party, 
one or more, as referees or arbitrators, not to bind the parties together ; 
for in relation to matrimony, where the ties of affection do not bind them, 
this is impossible ; but to say on what terms they shall separate, in regard 
not only to the property, but also to the maintenance and education of the 
children, if there be any ; which, the parties being satisfied therewith, 
may and ought to be final ; but should either or both of the parties be 
dissatisfied, then it may be carried to the court on the complaint of either 
party, and followed up to a final judgment or decision. 



SECOND APPENDIX. 195 

It may be said that this process would be attended with much expense. 
True. But knowing this to be the right and privilege of either party, not 
one out of a hundred would ever wish to separate at all ; for they would 
be fearful that they should not be able to do so well again ; and ninety- 
nine out of a hundred of those who did separate, would either separate by 
mutual consent (which would be the most likely) or else they would 
abide by the judgment of the referees, the expense of which would be 
but little, and nine times out of ten nothing. 

The marriage, therefore, however consummated, during the continuance 
of the covenant, should he considered as sacred as it is now, and would 
be preserved with mucli more faithfulness. The laws against adultery, 
bigamy, or poligamy, I find no fault with. The laws against seduction, 
or the violation of female chastity, cannot be made too severe. The only 
principle I object to in the present laws is the compelling people to live 
together, in a state of legal prostitution, as it were, when they are no 
longer married on the principles of sincere love and affection. I would 
have no one, therefore, marry for life, in the first instance, nor for any 
certain period of time ; but only as long as the marriage answers the ob- 
ject intended, namely, as long as it promotes the mutual happiness of the 
parties immediately concerned ; and until dissolved as above stated. And 
knowing that there was no other bond between them, but the bond of 
affection, the parties would naturally maintain greater faithfulness and 
fidelity towards each other than they do at present. Noio, you must be 
able to prove incontinence or some other high crime, before you can ob- 
tain a separation. Then, it would be sufficient to suspect it ; and there- 
fore each party would take good care to give no just cause for suspicion. 
So far as the public is concerned, therefore, nothing more is necessary than 
that, when a marriage is consummated, it should be publicly known. It 
should hence be reported to the proper authority, a public record kept of 
it, and the fact published to the woild in one or more public papers. And 
vice versa, when a marriage is dissolved, the same steps should be taken. 
This is all that owicernsthe public, so far as it regards the husband, or the 
wifo, or tha pa/rats of*children. But in regard to the maintenance and 
ed»earW*!i pf children, the people of the state or commonwealth have still 
a «r*%tor and mnch more important interest. 

ran it may be said that the principles laid down above, would give the 
pufctU immjiru* trouble in the maintenance and education of children, 
raraits, wbea they separated, might be disposed to abandon their chil- 
drto? Constituted as society now is, there might be some difficulty on 
thai heai ; though it is doubted whether there would be any greater than 
thera is at pree«nt. If parents lose their affection for each other, it does 
not necessarily follow that they will also lose it for their children ; and 
if not, they will mutually try to do the best they can for them. But, be 
not alarmed, the above principles are not intended for the present state of 
society st all, and not until all children are provided for by the public, 
(who are no* sufficiently provided for by their parents) both as it regards 
their maintenance and education ; so that, whether their parents should be 
living or dtsd % whether they lived together or lived separately, no children 
should be ai>awj"d to be in want, or to grow up in ignorance ; but well 
provided fw as long as there should be property enough in the common- 



196 SECOND APPENDIX. 

wealth to maintain and educate them. Let all parents have the privilege 
of maintaining and educating their own children, in their own way, if 
they will ; but if they will not, or even do not, they should be considered 
culpable, and no longer worthy of being guardians of their own children. 
All this I would do by a direct tax on property ; but if the public opinion 
should be in favor of a parent tax, in addition to the public tax on pro- 
perty, for the purpose of maintaining and educating all the children in the 
state, it would not be very objectionable, on condition that those parents 
who should maintain and educate their own children, free of expense to 
the state, should be exonerated from paying the parent tax ; but not the 
property tax ; for at all events all the children which should be bom, 
should be well maintained, and well educated. But it should also be ob- 
served that, when schools are, what they ought to be, schools of industry 
as well a* of science, there will be but very little public expense for schools, 
excepting for infant schools, because the scholars will nearly support 
themselves by their own labour. 

When these regulations, in regard to the maintenance and education of 
children shall be carried into effect, then the proposed regulations, in regard 
to matrimony, would be attended with no evil consequence* whatever ; 
but on the contrary, would be productive of much good. Fat even now, 
in the present state of society, it is a query, and is seriously doubted, 
whether the consequences of the regulations proposed above, would cause 
more difficulty and trouble on the whole, or even ha ; f so much, as is 
now caused by the present arbitrary and tyrannical law of marrying 
for life. 

But it will be perceived, and I wish to have h distinctly understood, 
that we propose no change in (not m what I*, altogether, but in what 
ought to be) the present practice, until there is a change in the law ; and 
whenever there is or shall be a change in the law, to act under that law, 
agreeably to the law, for the time being, will be acting just as legally, as 
it is now legal to marry for life. A. K. 



LETTER V. 

To the Editor of the " Trumpet." 
SIR, — I have already expressed a desire that you should co-operate 
with me in trying to meliorate the condition of the female part of com- 
munity ; for though the condition of many men is not at all to be envied, 
yet the condition of a much greater proportion of women is, as I appre- 
hend, still more deplorable. In my last 1 fully exposed the principles which 
have heretofore given you so much alarm, (merely because you did not 
understand them, as I conceive,) and against which you have cautioned 
all fathers and mothers who feel for the welfare of their sons, and more 
especially for their daughters ; for as such I have understood your lan- 
guage ; out we shall now see what you have to urge against any thing 
for which we contend. That our principles are not novel ; but are 
such as have been long since openly avowed, I shall show by copying 
an extract from the following address which was printed in, and bound up 



SECOND APPENDIX. 197 

with, Matthew Carey's quarto edition of the Bible, printed at Philadel- 
phia, in the year 1802, entitled " A Clergyman's Address to married 
persons at the altar." I shall alter the phraseology of some parts so as 
to suit my own views ; but not so as to vary the argument, in the least, 
in regard to the principle for which I have contended ; and that you, and 
our readers, generally, may know my words from the clergyman's in the 
following extract, they are all inclosed in brackets. — Aside, therefore, 
from what is inclosed in brackets, the Clergyman's words are as follow : — 

" The duties between man and wife are various and important. They 
suppose the union not of persons only, but also and principally of affec- 
tions. It is not joining of hands, but of hearts, which constitutes mar- 
riage in the sight of [reason and common sense.] This alone brings and 
preserves the sexes together, and both [consummates] and perfects this 
most solemn and [virtuous] connection. But where this is wanting, the 
mere cohabitation of man and woman, in spite of all the ceremonies in 
the world, is nothing better than a legal prostitution. The office says, 
and with great propriety, that, so many as are coupled together other- 
wise than [reason and common sense] allow, are not joined together of 
[love and affection,] neither is the matrimony [chaste.] 

" See, then, that no notions of interest or convenience deceive you 
into a notion that you love one another, while you do not. It is not the 
bare form of vowing in the most solemn manner at the altar, that can 
possibly give a sanction to falsehood, or render innocent such mercenary 
lies. 

" Trifle not, I charge you, in this solemn instance, with the [works] of 
Nature, truth, your own hearts, and your own comfort! Surely of 
all kinds and degrees of prostitution, that which screens itself under 
cover of the law, is the most criminal ; and she who gives her hand to 
the man whom she does not in fact prefer to [every other man whom she 
nan obtain',] is almost as worthless to all intents and purposes as a com- 
mon prostitute. [Truth] never [tolerates] the violation of nature, nor 
suffers it to take place with impunity. But this must be the case in every 
marriage where natural attachment is wanting. And that family is uni- 
formly cursed with the most substantial wretchedness, where there sub- 
sists no love between the heads of it." Then follows good and whole- 
some advice, to which no one could materially object, making in all 
about twice as much more than what I have quoted above. 

The above embraces all the principles for which we contend, which, 
when carried out to their full extent, would lead to all the practice for which 
we contend. You may substitute just what you please for the words 
inclosed in brackets, it will not alter the principle in the least. But when 
the clergyman says, as he does in the latter part of the address, " A wife 
should not only love her husband, but on every occasion show him all 
the attention in her power" I cannot fully agree with him ; but would 
say that a woman ought not to marry a man, and will not if she studies 
her own happiness, whom she does not love ; but whether she con- 
tinues to love him or not, will not depend on a sense of duty or obliga- 
tion growing out of her vow at the altar, but entirely on his continuing to 
be lovely in her estimation. While she lives with him, whether she love* 
him or not, it will be best for her, and most likely to promote her hap- 

17* 



198 SECOND APPENDIX. 

pin<H8, to treat him with all due respect. But love him she cannot unless 
Kfj continues to be lovely. 

Now if, as the clergyman says, nature is violated " in every marriage 
where natural attachment is wanting,' ' why is not nature equally violated 
in continuing the cohabitation when, from any cause whatever, the *.' na- 
tural attachment' ' has ceased to exist? And if she who thus violates 
nature in the first instance, merely because she can do it " under cover 
of the law," subjects herself to a " prostitution of all kinds and degrees, 
the most criminal, 5 ' and " is almost as worthless to all intents and pur- 
poses as a common prostitute," what is she who continues thus to violate, 
&c. merely because she is so situated that she can do it legally, when 
there is no longer a union of hearts and affections ; when she no 
longer prefers the man who is called her husband, and with whom she 
cohabits " to all the world," (to use the clergyman's own words) or to 
every other man whom she can obtain if she would (to use my words ?) 
Why is she any different now in reason, in nature, in truth, or in common 
sense, from what she would have been to have done exactly the same 
thing at first, which, according to the clergyman I have quoted, would 
have rendered her " almost as worthless as a common prostitute ?" 
Nothing but the law can make the least shadow of difference. And yet 
the clergyman says, iC where union of hearts and affections is wanting, 
the mere cohabitation of man and woman, in spite of all ceremonies in 
the world, is nothing better than a legal prostitution." I hope there- 
fore, sir, that I have been able to convince you that if our principles are 
erroneous on this subject, they are by no means novel. We only wish 
that these principles, being good, as well as just and true, as we believe 
them to be, should be carried out fully into practice. That we should 
study Nature, and follow her in all her ramifications ; believing that 
Nature never errs. That we should not only recommend, but adopt, and 
carry into practice, as far as we can, or as far as circumstances wil! permit, 
all the principles which we find in perfect unison with the nature of things, 
totally regardless of what other men, who lived in other ages, have either 
thought or done. We live for ourselves, and for the living, not for the 
dead. They could make no law, nor establish any customs which are at 
all binding on us, any farther than we approve of them. Such are the 
principles which not only have been discovered, but which have been re- 
commended by the wise and the good from time immemorial. " But he 
that letteth will let, till he is taken out of the way." So long as moneyed 
institutions and learned professions are allowed to hold such universal sway 
over the great mass of what are called the common people, as they do at 
present, it will be utterly impossible that there should be any thing like 
either rational liberty or perfect equality in this country. A. K. 



LETTER VI. 

To the Editor of the " Trumpet:' 
Sir. — I have now presented you and the public with all my views 
on the subject of matrimony, so far as it regards the moral principles by 



SECOND APPENDIX. 199 

which matrimony should be regulated and governed : and in our last, in 
order to show that my views are neither novel nor erroneous, I adduced 
the doctrine laid down by a clergyman, whose address I find in my great 
Bible ; which address has been before the public at least nearly thirty 
years, and how much longer I am unable to say, without its soundness 
ever being so much as once called in question, so far as my knowledge 
extends. I have therefore nothing further to add on this subject, until I 
see what you have to urge against what I have already written. And if 
you make no reply, I shall take your silence as a tacit acknowledgment 
that my principle* are correct, or at least, that you have nothing to urge 
against them. But before I close, I wish to call your attention once more 
to the first subject, that of God, and that you may know the whole extent 
of my scepticism, unbelief, cr atheism, I will refer you to an article be- 
low, headed " Thoughts on God." It is so very wicked that I have 
composed it with my own hands in my own new system of orthography, 
which I am not certain that you will be able to read, as I suppose your 
time is otherwise so much taken up that you have paid but very little at- 
tention to it. Should this be the fact, if you will only give me a hint of 
it, I will copy it all out for you, in the common orthography, on condition 
that you will publish it in the Trumpet, qnd undertake to refute its errors. 
You may say, perhaps, it is so blasphemous that you will not disgrace 
your columns with it. But why is it any more blasphemous for me to say 
just what I think about my God than it is for you to say what you think 
about your's, which you never hesitate to do. And if, in describing the 
character of my God, I blaspheme against your's ; then you, in describing 
the character of your God, blaspheme against mine. So here we are on 
equal ground, and may criminate and recriminate, we never shall be able 
to tell who is the greatest blasphemer. 

You have already pledged yourself to me, sir, and to the public, that 
you should " assault" my " atheism" whenever you had an " opportu- 
nity." — I gave you the earliest opportunity I possibly could, as you will 
find in the fourth number of the Investigator, and have thought you were 
waiting, perhaps, to know more fully what my atheism was, before you 
made the " assault ;" for I had no right to doubt but that you meant to 
make it whenever you had a good " opportunity." I have now let you 
know, if you can read the article, the full extent of my atheism, in every 
sense of the word. — I shall think, therefore, and the public will think too, 
if you do not make the assault now, it is because you see me so entrenched 
about with truth, reason, and the nature of things, on every side, that yon 
see no vulnerable point where you can commence the attack with the 
least probability of success. 

Another reason may possibly deter you — the same that keeps all the 
papers in the city silent in regard to me and the Investigator — they arc 
unwilling to let the public know, any farther than they find it out, without 
their aid, that there is such a paper in the city, as the one of which I have 
the honor (for I consider it as such) to be the editor ; so you, as I appre- 
hend, are afraid to agitate the question any more in the Trumpet, lest yon 
should be under the necessity of letting your readers know that there are 
opinions concerning God, other than your own, and which you are unable 
to refute ; and it might give your readers a wish to see more of those 



200 SECOND APPENDIX. 

opinions. In a word, and to speak perfectly plain, they might feel dis- 
posed to take the Investigator, which would most assuredly lead them to 
give up the Trumpet as soon as their present subscription expires. I do 
not mean to assert that this would inevitably be the fact ; I only surmise 
that these may be your fears. 

Now to refute all my supposed erroneous notions of the Deity, you only 
have to prove the existence of an intelligent Being, who is not organic, — 
and therefore is totally and altogether without organs of sense. For the 
moment you admit organs of sense, you want an organizer of your God, 
and are as much bound to prove his existence, as I want an organizer of 
myself, and am bound to prove his existence. But if you admit the exist- 
ence of a God without sense, as you must do if you admit the existence 
of a God without organs of sense, then there will not be the least shadow 
of difference between your God and mine. Having therefore, not only 
traced, but even chased your God from every position he holds, in the 
christian world, driven him from every post, and followed him till he is lost 
in an incomprehensible principle or power, wholly void of sense, being 
without organs of sense, and of course without intelligence, what need is 
there of preaching to support the character of such a God. He has no 
character which he can lose, and none that needs to be defended. Ail 
vour preaching therefore, as well as all other preaching, about God, hea- 
ven, eternity — to say nothing of hell and the devil, except it be the heaven 
or hell in our own minds, growing out of the virtues or vices of our own 
hearts, is, in my apprehension, not only vain and foolish, but also fraudu- 
lent and wicked ; for it is taking money from the people under false pre- 
tences — yea, it is no better than robbery ; it is, in fact, swindling ! 

Now, if you have any thing to answer, come out and defend yourself, 
and the brethren of your cloth, or else admit, what I verily believe to be 
the truth, that the above charges are just. 

Having freed my mind, I shall now bid you adieu until you are readv 
and willing to meet in the columns of the Trumpet, or some one else is 
willing to take up the glove, which I here throw down, and meet me in 
vour stead. ABNER KNEELAND. 



The following is the article alluded to in the last of the above letters, 
which is here inserted, not only in the new system, but also in the com- 
mon orthography, that the reader may perceive the full extent of my scep- 
ticism. This is a good article to show a comparative view of the two 
systems of orthography. They are both printed in the same size of type, 
yet one makes 75 lines, and the other only 67, a difference of 10 per cent, 
which would be of itself an object worth saving ; but this is nothing in 
comparison with the time it would save in learning children to read and spell- 

THOUGHTS OX GOD. 

Ov fiat beig er prinsipl horn crlsduns eel god, lerd, elmlti, (abi 
sevral ufir naras to h'c 4 i can ata£ no menin. h't'r) i no nefiin: a it wod 
be fie hit ev vaniti m me evn to pretend to hav em nohj en sue 1 a sub- 
ject. Yt i canet help mi nets abut it. If sud a beio, dus kctuah e$- 
lst, a n6s el nigs, he no3 tie smsenti ev mi hert, a fie encsti ev mi 
»severan3. H't'r ma be sd ev his egistenc, h"r, i d«t his havig e&r 



SECOND APPENDIX. 201 

nolij er mtelijenc,. For 1 am s"ut fiar can be no nolij h'r liar 13 no sens; 
a i canot consev ov fiar be in em sens h'r har er no organ 3 ov sens; 
a it |3 not pret-ndd bi em wun, hat i no ov, liat he beiy cold god 13 an 
erganisd berg. But on he suposiSn hat sud a bein dus actuali egist, 
h't must i hiDK ov him? Nu i idmit, as { canot deni, he ejisten§ ov 
an incemprehen*ibJ prinsiplorpur h'dcoiKns into lif 61 animatd natur, 
a uhr livig matr f as plants a tre*, h'd pyr ma be cold god for he san 
ev a nam, h6 i se no nesesiti ev em nam for it. For, aftr el, ©1 hat 
I no ov it, or can no ov it, 13 from he higs hat i behold, a from he 
facts h'd i no to ex,ist; for beyond hes, i no nohig. Jujin h'r from 
he hi§3 hat i se, a from he facts hat i no, a taKin, it for grantd hat el 
h'd I discuvr has prosedd from god, erfromh't godista c6l god, in sum 
wa or uhr, 6r in sum sens ev he wurd or uhr, i do not higK him so 
god a3 it 13 sd he i3 bi sum, nor so bad a3 it is sd he is bi uhr3, nor 
hef so god as i wun§ hot him to be. N*s, i do not blam him for beig 
no batr, nor pra.3 him for bein so god, bslevin as i do, hat h't'r he is, 
he 13 nesesenh hoet he is, a hat he can no mor danj hi3 6n natur nan 
i can danj min. 

Ehr God cod hav had hips betr han ha er, if he wod, but wod net; 
er els he wod hav had hig3 betr han ha er, if he cod, but cod not; er 
els he 13 pkfectli satisfid wih el hins a3 ha er. In he furst instane,, 
he 13 de3ervin no pra.3; in he secund, he is an object ev piti, rahr han 
blam; but in he hurd, he djfrs m nohig hat i can persev from natur: a. 
beig satisfid wih himsslf, a wih evn hin els, hoi lod not i be satisfid 
to? — a bein, satisfid, hoi sod i asK him for em hirj?— -i wi! asK him fer 
nehig; bec©3 61 he god h'd he can besto, he dus besto wiftyt mi 
asKin. Hoi §©d i hanx him for em tun? For he can no mor wih- 
hold he god he bestos, admitin. him to be perfect a undanjabl, han he 
•un can wihhold its lit a het. & if he wod besto em mor god en me 
nan he du3, if he cod, but canot, it 13 a3 unfertunat for him as it is 
fer me. 'H'r, belevig m his undanjabiliti, i can neftr pras him nor 
blam him for bein h't he is, elho i am pirfecth satisfid hat he s*od be 
as hi is, evn as i am satisfid to be a3 i am. & he resn i am so satisfid 
is, perhaps, bece3 i no hat h'l i egist, i hav no pyr to be, for he tim 
bein, unrwfe han as i am. 

Henc; i can se no object m wurs'ipin God, unl^s ties express ev 
satisfacn (h'd er nasesen onh as ha tend to yr on hapmes) ma be con- 
■idrd wursip. lies express gro yt ov yr on feligs, h'd felins con- 
ftitut yr on hapmes. Heng it must be ebvius hat God recoir3 no 
<5urds, no templ3 or public hol3, for hi3 on sax: but, if proprli yusd, 
we ned hm for he sax ev yrselv3, a. ev yr dildren, as ha er nesesen 
feryr 6n impruvment a hapmes as wl as har3. & he mor we promot 
Hr on hapmes, a he hapmes ev yr spe^is, he mor, a3 i consev, we act 
tgreabh to he perfecn ev moral natur, a ov c6rs he most ascreabh to he 
wil ev Ged, if God has dm wil; a, if he 13 suseptibl ev plezur, he mor 
bSmustbeplesd. 

Ged, ho^vr er h't'r he ma be, stand 3 in he sam relan to el creturs 
as he dus to em, a h'r must ecoali delit in he hapmes ov 61. 

TOes er mi vus, sentiments a fehn3 m relan to he bein cold Ged, 
admitig hat sud a bein a3 Ged is sd to be dus actuali e^ist. If ha er 
ren, i pre3um he wil corect hm, if he hav em wis* hat ha s*od be cer- 
ectd. If hi du3 net cerect hm, it must be ehr becos he canet, er wil 



202 SECOND APPENDIX. 

net; or els bscos fia er perfecth mdifrent to him. But if fie evils a ne 
errs ev mm er pirfecth mdifrent to God, n'n he is fie feftr ov fie hu- 
man rac,, is it posibl hat he 13 a beig ov mtibjsng? Slurh, mded, i 
tuns: net. 

If utirs hir^K difrenth h"r, It hm s*o betr resns for tiar hots nan £ 
hav s*on for min. But unles, a until, God manifests himself to me*, 
in a. wa hat he has nevr yt dun, 1 ^al be irnur lie nesesiti ov stil higKig 
in regard to him, (as wl as on ol uhr subjects, until i am tot betr) as 1 
nu do; a. 3al belev hat i am rit. 

The above being afterwards inserted in the Investigator, in the common 
orthography, for the benefit of all readers, is, for the same purpose, repeat- 
ed here. 

THOUGHTS ON GOD. 

Of that being or principle whom christians call god, lord, almighty, (and 
by several other names to which I can attach no meaning whatever) I 
know nothing : and it would be the height of vanity in me even to pretend 
to nnv© *»;y knowledge on such a subject. Yet I cannot help my thoughts 
about it. if such a being does actually exist, and knows all things, he 
knows the sincerity of my heart, and the honesty of my asseverations. — 
Whatever may be said of his existence, however, I doubt his having either 
knowledge or intelligence. For I am sure there can be no knowledge 
where there is no sense ; and I cannot conceive of there being any sense 
where there are no organs of sense ; and it is not pretended by any one 
that I know of, that the being called god is an organized being. But on 
the supposition that such a being does actually exist, what shall I think of 
him? Now I admit, as I cannot deny, the existence of an incomprehensi- 
ble principle or power which quickens into life all animated nature, and 
other living matter, as plants and trees, which power may be called god 
for the sake of a name, though I see no necessity of any name for it. For, 
after all, all that I know of it, or can know of it, is from the things that I 
behold, and from the facts which I know to exist ; for beyond these, I 
know nothing. Judging therefore from the things that I see, and from the 
facts that I know, and taking it for granted that all which I discover has 
proceeded from god, or from what godists call god, in some way or other, 
or in some sense of the word or other, I do not think him so good a* it is 
said he is by some, nor so bad as it is said he is by others, nor half so good 
as I once thought him to be. Nevertheless, I do not blame him for being 
no better, nor praise him for being so good, believing as I do, that what- 
ever he is, he is necessarily what he is, and that he can no more change 
his own nature than I can change mine. 

Either God could have had things better than they are, if he would, but 
would not ; or else he would have had things better than they are, if be 
could, but could not ; or else he is perfectly satisfied with all things as 
they are. In the first instance, he is deserving no praise ; in the second, 
he is an object of pity, rather than blame ; but in the third, he differs in 
nothing that I can perceive from nature : and being satisfied with himself, 
and with every thing else, why should not I be satisfied too ? and being 
satisfied, why should I ask him for any thing ? — I will ask him for nothing ; 
because all the good which he can bestow, he does bestow without my 



SECOND APPENDIX. 203 

asking. Why should I thank him for any thing ? For he can no more 
withhold the good he bestows, admitting him to be perfect and unchange- 
able, than the sun can withhold its light and heat. And if he would be- 
stow any more good on me than he does, if he could, but cannot, it is as 
unfortunate for him as it is for me. Therefore, believing in his unchange- 
ability, I can neither praise him nor blame him for being what he is, al- 
though I am perfectly satisfied that he should be as he is, even as I am 
satisfied to be as I am. And the reason I am so satisfied is, perhaps, be- 
cause I know that while I exist, I have no power to be, for the time be- 
ing, otherwise than as I am. 

Hence I can see no object in worshipping God, unless these expressions 
of satisfaction (which are necessary only as they tend to our own happi- 
ness) may be considered worship. These expressions grow out of our 
own feelings, which feelings constitute our own happiness. Hence it must 
be obvious that God requires no churches, no temples or public halls, for 
his own sake ; but, if properly used, we need them for the sake of our- 
selves, and of our children, and they are necessary for our own improve- 
ment and happiness as well as theirs. And the more we promote our own 
happiness, and the happiness of our species, the more, as I conceive, we 
act agreeably to the perfection of moral nature, and of course the most 
agreeably to the will of God, if God has any will ; and if he is suscepti- 
ble of pleasure, the more he must be pleased. 

God, whoever or whatever he may be, stands in the same relation to all 
creatures as he does to any, and therefore must equally delight in the hap- 
piness of all. 

These are my views, sentiments, and feelings, in relation to the being 
called God, admitting that such a being as God is said to be docs actually 
exist. If they are wrong, I presume he will correct them, if he have any 
wish that they should be corrected. If he does not correct them, it must 
be either because he cannot, or will not ; or else because they are perfect- 
ly indifferent to him. But if the evils and the errors of man are perfectly 
indifferent to God, notwithstanding he is the father of the human race, is 
it possible that he is a being of intelligence ? Surely, indeed, I think not. 

If others think differently however, let them show better reasons for their 
thoughts than I have shown for mine. But unless, and until, God mani- 
fests himself to me, in a way that he has never yet done, I shall be under 
the necessity of still thinking in regard to him (as well as on all other sub- 
jects until I am taught better) as I now do ; and shall believe that I am 
right. 



Since the Rev. Thomas Whittemore, editor of the Trumpet, has treated 
the above, as well as the preceding letters, with utter silence, we now so- 
licit the attention of any other of the clergy, to whom these presents may 
come, and not only invite them, but respectfully and specially request 
them, to point out whatever is deemed to be erroneous in the preceding 
work, or in the above statements ; and show as good reasons for their 
opinions as are here given for a contrary belief. 

It is time that the clergy were called upon, one and all, to prove their 
dogmas true, or else quit their trade. There is nothing essential to Christi- 
anity, or which can be claimed as peculiarly christian, that is even suscep- 



204 SECOND APPEND^. 

tible of proof. Nothing strictly moral can be claimed as being exclusiv 
christian, or as being originally taught by the supposed founder of tl 
sect. The very best morals in the new testament had been taught 
Confucius, the Chinese pilosopher, 500 years before. And, aside from 
pretended miracles and the doctrine of a future life founded on a resurr 
tion of the dead, together with the existence of a being called God, 
opposite called the devil, others called angels, spirits, ghosts, demons, 
also the places called heaven and hell, wherein does Christianity differ i 
far as it is good) from the moral precepts taught by all good men from 1 
remotest antiquity ? But none of the above particulars, which distingu 
Christianity from other dogmas, perhaps equally but not more erroneo 
have been proved, or are even susceptible of proof. Yea, more ; 1 
clergy are becoming too wise to attempt to prove them. But they^v 
be under the necessity of making the attempt, ere long, or else lose ma 
out of their congregations, and if they do make the attempt, as they ; 
well aware, they will lose more. A studied silence is now observed in i 
gard to the works and labours of Free Enquirers ; and the knowledge 
them must extend through the medium of their own works alone. T 
clergy seem to be perfectly conscious of the invulnerability of the grou 
Free Enquirers have assumed, as well as the weakness and untenable™ 
of their own cause. Hence prudence may dictate to them what they m 
consider the wisest course, namely, to avoid coming in contact. 

We here once more, or rather I, (for I do not wish to implicate ai 
other, with my sins) commit the foregoing work, with this appendage, in 
the hands of a discerning public ; not pledging myself to take notice « 
every thing that may be said about it ; but should any errors in regard 
matters of fact be pointed out, and should the evidence adduced cause 
reasonable doubt of their being true, as herein stated, during my life-tim 
and while I am able to write, the public may rest assured they shall he 
from me again, either in defence of what is here published, or else in a 
knowledement of the error. So says the public's obedient servant, 
^ ABNER KNEELAND. 

Boston, September, 1831. 



THE END. 



ip-ftafc 



v, :ym: <r*+ 










V^ Deacidified using the Bookkeeper process. 

O V Neutralizing agent: Magnesium Oxide 

rt Treatment Date: Feb. 2005 

\ PreservationTechnologies 

^ ' % A WORLD LEADER IN PAPER PRESERVATIOI 

1 1 1 Thomson Park Drive 
Cranberry Township, PA 16066 
(724)779-2111 



•I 








* w L .. °^ '°"' & <* <*?!> ,o* 



a\ x> * • * • ^0^ o -o , A * A 








^,s* :W£ **. ^ 



